The Sedgwick County Commission will consider vetoing Goddard’s plan to give a developer $3.5 million in state incentives to build apartments at the Genesis Sports Complex, documents show.
The committee’s May 8 agenda was released Friday afternoon, just hours after a Wichita Eagle report revealed that $1.2 million of the stimulus package would be used to finance a land transfer from an LLC owned by Rodney Steven II and Brandon Steven to an affiliated LLC with unknown owner. and unclear ties to Rodney Steven II.
The land would be the site for 100 garden-style apartments near baseball and softball diamonds at the Genesis Sports Complex south of Kellogg in Goddard. It would be the second time Goddard has used state incentives to purchase the 7.57-acre site for a developer.
Three commissioners, the number needed to reject the incentives, have expressed opposition to Goddard’s plan: Republicans Jim Howell and David Dennis, whose district includes Goddard, and Democrat Sarah Lopez. Republicans Ryan Baty and Pete Meitzner said Friday afternoon that they were still investigating the project.
“My job is to protect all taxpayers in the county, not just the special interests of a few,” Lopez said in a statement. “Goddard could benefit from these homes, but not at the backs of everyone else.”
The Wichita suburb wants to use new state incentives for a land deal involving the Steven brothers
Sedgwick County staff has prepared a draft resolution outlining three “negative impacts” that could be grounds for voiding the City of Goddard’s incentive deal: negative fiscal impact on the county, unnecessary costs to taxpayers and the risk of waste of tax money. The committee can adopt the resolution to block the deal or take no action, allowing it to pass by default.
The Wichita suburb has already approved a $2 million federal housing grant and $17.35 million in industrial revenue bonds — eliminating sales taxes on building materials — to subsidize the apartment project.
Goddard’s city manager said the apartment project cannot be completed “without” an additional $3.5 million in Reinvestment Housing Incentive District funds, which the Goddard City Council unanimously approved at its April 15 meeting.
Similar to tax increment financing – or TIF – KHIDs direct local property taxes within the district to reimburse developers for eligible costs such as land acquisition and public improvements. KHIDs can last up to 25 years — five years longer than TIF districts — meaning properties in reinvestment districts this year wouldn’t appear on the tax roll until 2049.
Any local taxing jurisdiction in the District may void a KHID project within 30 days or the incentives will automatically take effect. In Goddard, that includes the Sedgwick County Commission and the Goddard School District.
The RHID incentive program was limited to rural areas but was recently expanded by the Kansas Legislature to allow its use in urban and suburban housing projects. Much of Wichita and its suburbs are now eligible for the housing stimulus.
The Goddard apartment project is the first RHID project approved by a local government in Sedgwick County.
The county or school board can veto any RHID project that the commissioners determine would have “negative impacts” on the project. Commissioners have previously expressed concerns that KHIDs in Sedgwick County could create an unfair playing field that rewards developers while placing property taxes on everyone else.
“It is clear that we have a housing shortage in Sedgwick County,” Baty, chairman of the commission, said in a statement to The Eagle. “Any incentive instrument, such as KHID, should only be used if the market cannot meet the need without its use. I think there is room for this program with a very limited scope of affordable housing and urban infill development. I am still evaluating the Goddard project and working to find answers to several problems.”
The agenda’s staff report and a draft resolution outline three reasons why the commission could void Goddard’s incentive deal.
▪ “The negative fiscal impact of the proposed district on Sedgwick County outweighs the benefits.”
▪ “The apartment complex in the proposed district is economically viable without incentives, causing the proposed district to unnecessarily create additional costs for county taxpayers.”
▪ “Financial guarantees from the developer are insufficient to mitigate the risk of default, creating the risk of spending provincial taxpayer dollars on a project with an increased risk of default and waste of taxpayer dollars.”
