Email This Story

Subject:
Recipient's Email:
Sender's Email:
captcha 136e415678424a70b641b9d071eea9de
Enter text seen above:


Keys to the city

Keys to the city

In respect to the Rural Housing Incentive District policy that passed at the July 11 Hays City Commission meeting, I complimented Commissioner Shaun Musil after the meeting that he and the whole commission have their hearts in the right place.

We should always respect that majority rules, but sometimes the majority doesn't always get it right in ruling to emotional appeal in contrast to taking more time for logical thought. Once again, lack of exercising an option to postpone can lead one to think that the special interests of one might be guiding this issue.

This policy. while making some people feel good, does little to nothing in truly addressing the concerns of the disabled. The only person missing in the commission chambers was a Nancy Pelosi of sorts to encourage passage before thoroughly reading the content in Section C.

Section C, as was addressed to in a letter to commissioners, by me on the side, highlighted the 10 points in the revision that should surely be given a second look by any investors out there looking to cash in on an opportunity. Here are the condensed carrots to which they can feed upon: acquisition of property within the RHID, payment of relocation assistance, site preparation, sanitary and storm sewers and lift stations, drainage conduits, channels and levees, street grading, paving, curbs and gutters, street lighting, underground public and limited private utilities, all located within the public right of way, sidewalks, water mains and extensions.

An investor wanting to erect 32 units, couldn't have written a more self-serving policy except, now knowing that a concern in the public has taken on a focus to address the disabled. A developer will want to adjust the application submitted by adding in a few token units to address that wanted attention and to do no more than a minimal amount of these units in an attempt to passive those interests. To do more would substantially affect the bottom line profits to be gained in the short term, though subsidized by other property taxpayers, and you can bet will be adjusted upward after 15 years of abatements in the long term, recouping the losses at the expense of the tenants at that time.

Since the attitude is to "get the ball rolling," we should be reminded that "haste makes waste."

No reason to limit Section 3 to 10 carrots, as a dozen has more appeal. Amend the policy now to include No. 11, city to provide management of the complex for them, and No. 12, (an old-time practice) give honorary keys from the city to our saviors.

Guy Windholz

Hays