The Kansas City *Gallery*

[weava]

Originally Posted by ScraperDude

I have to move to Kansas City in the spring as my better half got a promotion (his hometown as well) and we have to move there. I don't want to leave Columbus because I love it here. Anyway I have been doing my research on KC metro using some of the forums online and I have never seen a more divided metro than KC, MO and KC, KS.
It's not just the forums but everytime I've been out there to visit almost everyone I've encountered hates the Kansas side or they hate the Missouri side.

It's almost disturbing and disheartening that I'm about to be surrounded by such a division. I've described it to my family as an American Berlin with an invisible wall.

its more political than anything, because Kansas government wants to steal all of the missouri side jobs and hurt the overall metro so they can gain tax base.
look up the civil war history of the jayhawkers and tigers fighting each other during the civil war and you will see how bad it used to be.

[ScraperDude]

Originally Posted by weava

its more political than anything, because Kansas government wants to steal all of the missouri side jobs and hurt the overall metro so they can gain tax base.
look up the civil war history of the jayhawkers and tigers fighting each other during the civil war and you will see how bad it used to be.

I'm trying to wrap my mind around the whole Kansas stealing jobs thing. True they are hitting Missouri's tax base but the jobs are remaining in the metro right? I'm certain the people currently employed at those companies aren't losing their jobs just because of a move. I look at it as a company moving from one suburb to another or from the city to a suburb. Why doesn't Missouri extend the same offer to companies potentially lured by Kansas?

Plenty of cities in bi/tri state regions have companies move across state lines but within metros and no one has a melt down (at least out this way) but KC seems to really go ape shit crazy on both sides if a company moves on one side of the line, which I have only heard of companies moving to JOCO and not to KCMO

It's better for a company STAY in a metro than Leave all together right?

[weava]

Originally Posted by ScraperDude

It's better for a company STAY in a metro than Leave all together right?

That is the problem, they are only taking jobs that are already in the metro rather than creating new jobs, and at the same time hurting the average tax payer because we have to pick up the tab when all these rich companies aren't paying taxes. The Missouri side has the zoo, stadiums, arenas, union station, etc to pay for and Kansas who doesn't pay for any of the regional attractions is undercutting the tax base that pays for those things.

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/12/01...nly-hurts.html

[SteveWasco12]

Originally Posted by ScraperDude

I'm trying to wrap my mind around the whole Kansas stealing jobs thing. True they are hitting Missouri's tax base but the jobs are remaining in the metro right?

What's hard to wrap your head around? Moving these jobs means moving people.
That means loss of tax revenue loss.
Add it up and you have the perfect storm of urban decay.
TAX BASE LOSS TAX BASE LOSS TAX BASE LOSS.

Imagine a beautiful major city in Missouri - then in the 70's until today the kansas suburbs collude to do everything they can to steal jobs across the state line. Those jobs require buildings and also are the tax base. Thus cheap, kansas farmland becomes mile after mile of ugly sprawled suburban office parks. The city, KCMO loses millions year after year from the tax base as those jobs move across state line. The city's schools, roads, bridges and services erode.

To top it off, the state Govt of Kansas uses MASSIVE tax incentives to lure those companies to leave the city and the state. So the city has to compete/match incentives from the Kansas municipality AND the state Govt of Kansas incentives added together. All the while the residents of the Kansas suburbs do NOTHING to improve the urban core, the culture, or the stature of the city overall. The Kansas suburbs are the pathetic epitome of idiotic insular suburban mindset. They leach off of all of the big city amenities (museums, major sports venues, cultural attractions, etc) while contributing NOTHING to the city.

It's the perfect picture of the suburbs leaching off of the city. Only this is an entire state collaborating with the kansas suburb municipalities. It's the purest of evil.

[ScraperDude]

Originally Posted by SteveWasco12

What's hard to wrap your head around? Moving these jobs means moving people.
That means loss of tax revenue loss.
Add it up and you have the perfect storm of urban decay.
TAX BASE LOSS TAX BASE LOSS TAX BASE LOSS.

Imagine a beautiful major city in Missouri - then in the 70's until today the kansas suburbs collude to do everything they can to steal jobs across the state line. Those jobs require buildings and also are the tax base. Thus cheap, kansas farmland becomes mile after mile of ugly sprawled suburban office parks. The city, KCMO loses millions year after year from the tax base as those jobs move across state line. The city's schools, roads, bridges and services erode.

To top it off, the state Govt of Kansas uses MASSIVE tax incentives to lure those companies to leave the city and the state. So the city has to compete/match incentives from the Kansas municipality AND the state Govt of Kansas incentives added together. All the while the residents of the Kansas suburbs do NOTHING to improve the urban core, the culture, or the stature of the city overall. The Kansas suburbs are the pathetic epitome of idiotic insular suburban mindset. They leach off of all of the big city amenities (museums, major sports venues, cultural attractions, etc) while contributing NOTHING to the city.

It's the perfect picture of the suburbs leaching off of the city. Only this is an entire state collaborating with the kansas suburb municipalities. It's the purest of evil.

I see your point and understand the loss of tax base. It's definitely not favorable.
I've seen urban decay up close with Cleveland. Kansas City has a long way to go before its on par with Cle-towns decline. KCMO looks like a healthy downtown/city to me. Since I'm not living there currently maybe theres something I'm not seeing.

I see things differently about suburbs not contributing though. Take Cinicinnati for example it has 2 states other than Ohio that it's suburbs sprawl into and people from those states use Cincinnati's museums, sporting events and cultural attractions and pay nothing from their taxes to fund these venues and no one really complains. I'm sure a few people do complain. They are however attending these venues (paying for tickets/entry fees) thus supporting them. Sure they didn't foot the bill to build the venue but they're supporting it by showing up. In turn aren't people from the Kansas suburbs attending the attractions in KCMO and paying the entry fees/ticket fees? Thats a contribution is it not?

Now when it comes to the state of Kansas colloborating with the KC-KS suburbs to lure companies well that is just wrong and a bit unethical. It's like biting the hand that feeds you. One or two companies... ok but if they have been doing this since the 70's and until recntly I heard they tried to lure AMC, well they obviously have some issues with attracting companies from outside the metro on their own, so they take from their neighbor.

My question is why has KCMO let these companies slip across the state line for KS incentives? Can KCMO not afford to make a better or equal offer?

[SteveWasco12]

Originally Posted by ScraperDude

I see your point and understand the loss of tax base. It's definitely not favorable.
I've seen urban decay up close with Cleveland. Kansas City has a long way to go before its on par with Cle-towns decline. KCMO looks like a healthy downtown/city to me. Since I'm not living there currently maybe theres something I'm not seeing. ?

Well as you can tell by my heated reply, this is a very touchy subject to people who grew up in KCMO and still care about the city. I can't relate to Cleveland but I'll take your word for it. I've watched for 4 decades as the state of kansas has poached companies from KCMO. Finally in the early 90's KCMO started waking up, realizing that the loss had eroded their tax base to the point of devastation and started fighting back. Sadly they had an inept mayor (Cleaver) that allowed even more malaise while city business leaders wrung their hands.

Originally Posted by ScraperDude

I see things differently about suburbs not contributing though. Take Cinicinnati for example it has 2 states other than Ohio that it's suburbs sprawl into and people from those states use Cincinnati's museums, sporting events and cultural attractions and pay nothing from their taxes to fund these venues and no one really complains. I'm sure a few people do complain. They are however attending these venues (paying for tickets/entry fees) thus supporting them. Sure they didn't foot the bill to build the venue but they're supporting it by showing up. In turn aren't people from the Kansas suburbs attending the attractions in KCMO and paying the entry fees/ticket fees? Thats a contribution is it not? ?

There are huge differences between KC and Cinci. In KC you step across the street and you're in Kansas. It's not the same in Cinci, StL, etc where you have a physical barrier like a river. Also, the Johnson County Kansas side of the state line was almost complete undeveloped. Many CEO's & business leaders built huge mansions there in the 40's, 50's & 60's to avoid the city, it's crime, taxes, etc. Kansas in the 40's-80's was a very Rebublican state with a corporate/pro business, low corporate tax, low regulation mentality that handed businesses that were there and moved there anything they wanted. Those same CEO's of companies in the city that had homes on kansas farmland realized that they could shorten their commute to nothing AND save tax $$ at the same time. They could also build a cheap sprawled office park campus with free parking on the flatest, cheapest land on planet earth just right down the street from their homes. Also, Kansas is a right to work state and businesses that moved there could eliminate Union influence. They could also stop paying the 1% KCMO earnings tax. All of this was a perfect storm. There's more - much more.

Originally Posted by ScraperDude

Now when it comes to the state of Kansas colloborating with the KC-KS suburbs to lure companies well that is just wrong and a bit unethical. It's like biting the hand that feeds you. One or two companies... ok but if they have been doing this since the 70's and until recntly I heard they tried to lure AMC, well they obviously have some issues with attracting companies from outside the metro on their own, so they take from their neighbor. ?

Yes, it's completely unethical, but to kansans it's validated since they resent Missouri. They see Missouri as a slave state and KCMO as an old, urban cesspool of crime, homelessness & liberal Democrat-machine politics. They see Missouri as the state of outlaw robbers like Jessie James & the the Mafia influence that had a choke hold on the city for decades. Wild West KC was the "original" Las Vegas, where prostitution, gambling and other vices were rarely checked. And there's plenty more historical resentment - it goes back to the pre-civil war era when Kansans crossed the state line of Missouri to kill slave-owners and burn plantations. Then Missouri rebels retaliated and burned down & murdered practically the entire city of lawrence KS - the hotbed of Union resistance at the time. This went on for years and you can imagine the hate and resentment that is just as heated today in those towns that were effected.

There are dozens of recent examples of KS trying to steal MO companies - it's a never-ending struggle - all validated by the deep seated historical resentment.

Originally Posted by ScraperDude

My question is why has KCMO let these companies slip across the state line for KS incentives? Can KCMO not afford to make a better or equal offer?

There's the kicker, the state govt of Kansas ADDS it's incentives to the local suburban municipality giveaway that's trying to lure the company across. This gives them an unfair, huge advantage since KCMO is older and has tons of infrastructure to maintain and cannot offer the same incentives. Also, the state of Missouri doesn't help much because it's a much larger state with many more fish to fry including older, larger metro STL which sucks up most of the $$. That leaves KCMO sucking wind.

KC is great city, you'll love it here. If we didn't have the state line this city would be even greater. The state line is the single worst problem/issue this city has. It is truely a dividing hurdle that we cannot get past. I do not ever, ever see that changing, it's just life here.

[ScraperDude]

Thanks for taking the time to go deeper into this. Now I understand more what the divide is all about as opposed to the usual replies I get from the very few people I know there.
Not being from KC I still won't feel the way you and all the natives do about the situation. I don't want to be a part of any division but already my partner refuses to live on the Kansas side so we're looking at the Ward Park neighborhood to move to. I'm hoping my current job will let me work remotely from KC or else I will have to find a job there and I kinda don't want to live in MO and work in KS and get shit from people about it so I plan on looking at the companies downtown. I guess eventually though I'll have to pledge my loyality to MO and just stay on that side. It's a weird feeling for me.

[SteveWasco12]

LoL you don't have to pledge any loyalty! And avoiding the issue is best for a newcomer.
You'll have time to make your own observations.
But I think eventually you will fall in lve with this city - everyone does, even hard core St Louisans!

On a professional level it's not discussed openly... it's like religion, politics, etc. It's an "untouchable subject". Also, a huge % of Johnson Cty Kansans are relatively new to the area and are in complete denial about the negative economic & social impact their poaching and avoidance of civic responsibility to the core city is doing.

KC has a pretty decent development forum with almost 2800 members devoted to the urban core, lots of good info for a newcomer.
http://forum.kcrag.com/index.php

[IraGlacialis]

Originally Posted by ScraperDude

I see your point and understand the loss of tax base. It's definitely not favorable.
I've seen urban decay up close with Cleveland. Kansas City has a long way to go before its on par with Cle-towns decline. KCMO looks like a healthy downtown/city to me. Since I'm not living there currently maybe theres something I'm not seeing.

Fortunately, urban KCMO is slowly and surely turning itself around. A good portion of all the old skyscrapers downtown are being reconditioned as lofts, as is the city market district to the direct north. To the direct south, the area has been converted to an art district with loft space. Plus you have the Sprint center, P&L district (which attracts a lot of younger people, especially out-of-towners), and the soon-to-be completed performing arts center. That's also why you see the downtown as pretty healthy, as it has been completely gentrified, which I mean with no negative connotation.
Hopefully, soon the northeast side (which is pretty much very low income with a high black, Latino, and Vietnamese population) will increase in prosperity as well, though in a different manner.

Since SteveWasco mentioned the key points, I won't go into detail how KC got the way it did and why there is such resentment between the two sides (besides the Jayhawkers and Bushwhackers, I highly encourage you to look up Order no. 11 (which may have, ironically, been a factor in allowing KC's growth as it eliminated a lot of competition)). I also have to say that it isn't just Johnson County, KS that has been key to KC's decline. On the Missouri side, you have Lee's Summit and the Northland where people have been flocking to in droves. and there have been times that Clay and Platte county to the north refuse to pay for KC as well.
As for JOCO, I don't have that much seething hatred like many people. However that is not to say that the fact that jobs have been poached to the KS side and that JOCO refuses to pay for the attractions that they frequent doesn't upset me greatly. That and the fact that recent KC suburbia is known for uncontrolled sprawl filled with mcmansions (which are completely soulless compared to the mansions at Ward Pkwy (good choice BTW) and Mission Hills (one of the few neighborhoods I like in KS)).
One thing I know is that that area did end up getting hit pretty hard by the recession, and I am sure with the increase in gas prices, living there will be highly impractical.
Hopefully, jobs start moving back as well; which many are.

As SteveWasco also points out, kcrag is a good resource for Kansas City urban issues. However, let's just say the vitriol sometimes tends to flow freely.

In any case, welcome to KC. I am sure you will like it.

[IraGlacialis]

Anyhoo, back to pictures.

First five taken during the week of Thanksgiving. Last two taken July.

[ScraperDude]

The roof of the new performing arts center... what's under the protective coverings? Glass? Metal?

[SteveWasco12]

metal... I believe those metal areas covered by the black covering are being replaced because they are defective, bent, rippled, etc during installation.

[Chadoh25]

Love those Black and Whites!

[VelesHomais]

Excellent light play:


Is that a railway station on the foreground of the skyline photograph? Looks a bit like DC's

[jock in da pool]

Great photos everyone , one day i would love to visit kansas city.In the meantime i will have to make do with this wonderful thread . just one question if anyone could help when would be the best time of year to visit the city (i don't mind bad weather) i am british after all.

[kanhawk]

Originally Posted by jock in da pool

Great photos everyone , one day i would love to visit kansas city.In the meantime i will have to make do with this wonderful thread . just one question if anyone could help when would be the best time of year to visit the city (i don't mind bad weather) i am british after all.

I would recommend September or October. Mild temperature at that time.

[SteveWasco12]

Originally Posted by jock in da pool

Great photos everyone , one day i would love to visit kansas city.In the meantime i will have to make do with this wonderful thread . just one question if anyone could help when would be the best time of year to visit the city (i don't mind bad weather) i am british after all.

Late April to to June or Sept to mid Oct is best IMO. June, July & August are sensationally hot & humid.

[IraGlacialis]

Either visit in late spring or early fall.

Originally Posted by VelesHomais

Excellent light play:
Is that a railway station on the foreground of the skyline photograph? Looks a bit like DC's

Thanks.
Yeah, it's the interior of KC's Union Station.

[jock in da pool]

thanks guys

[SteveWasco12]

The Grand Lobby in the Kauffman Center under construction
by http://blog.ericbowersphoto.com