March 19, 2026 • 41 mins
Omaha City Councilman Brinker Harding joins the show for a no-BS breakdown of the issues hitting your wallet and your neighborhood. Property taxes, TIF, and yes… even parking on your own grass.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
I am your current host of this great show that
we have just started the last week. For the ten
to eleven hour, I was going to say I just
used to work for the City of Omaha instead of
going through all those things that I used to do.
But I want to hear the listeners feedback, your comments,
your concerns, your complaints. Really anything goes on this show,
whether it's city, state, national, or the world. And of
(00:22):
course you will get plenty of opinions from me, Jean
stother but it's your chance to speak up and sound off.
So you can send your emails and you to your
emails to comments. Comment at kfab dot com. Just comment,
not comments, although you can comments and then or you
can call four two, five, five, eight eleven ten. Before
(00:45):
we get into today's show, I did want to give
a little additional information. One of the callers yesterday I
hope you're still listening, called in about the traffic signals
and the timing of the traffic signals, and I said,
I experienced the same thing everybody else does. It is
for us, but we are and I talked a little
bit about the plan that we have and it is
called the Signal Master Plan, and it is about eighty
(01:08):
five percent complete right now. I said public Works yesterday
controls the signal timing, and it is traffic engineering manages
the signal timing under public Works. But just a little
more information. Some of our quarters are coordinated to limit
the stops in a queue, but eventually the drivers will
(01:29):
have to stop. But still it's being done for smooth sailing.
Like I said, as you go east in the morning
and west in the afternoon. The goal is really to
manage intersection traffic as efficiently as possible while allowing phases
at all legs without too long of a wait. So
we can observe this now also with cameras and sometimes
(01:50):
we use drones, particularly at rush hour. But this is important.
If anyone submits a request because they think an intersection
isn't properly working right, then we will evaluate it. So
I want the listeners to understand that, so you can
call in. You can call the MARES hotline at four
four four five five five five and request that, or
you can call public Works. One other comment I wanted
(02:12):
to make is when I made a comment yesterday that
I was actually mistaken, so I will always miss I
always admit my mistakes, but I said, we are working
with Hawkins Construction to have hot asphalt all year round.
And I said, we were still using the coal patch. Actually,
Hawkins asphalt plant has been up and running for just
(02:33):
about a year now and they have provided hot asphalt
over the winter this year, so the hot asphalt is
available early on, I said yesterday. Usually our asphalt plant
doesn't fire up until April, but we do have it now.
And thank you to Hawkins Construction. Very good that they
were working with the city to provide this so those
do last those patches a little bit longer. And this
(02:55):
was in a conversation about my favorite subject, potholes, every
mayor's nightmare. But Peyton is here with me again today.
Good morning, Peyton, Good morning Gina.
Speaker 2 (03:05):
Good to be with you.
Speaker 1 (03:06):
Thank you me too. It's good to see you too.
Peyton is a former soccer player. We had a lot
of talk about that yesterday because my son was a
soccer player too. And I see I heard you this morning.
You gave the disclaimer after Chris Baker commercial and you're
really catching on at that because you did all that.
Speaker 3 (03:23):
Yes, just in case anybody's curious, I do not talk
that fast. They speed it up in production. Oh do
they Because I heard it my son. I was like,
I did not talk like that, but it sounds really good.
Speaker 1 (03:36):
I know you got it, I said. I always think
those disclaimers sound so crazy when they go and that's
what you were.
Speaker 2 (03:41):
Doing this morning.
Speaker 1 (03:42):
So I have a guest to start out this morning.
Brink Harding is here with me. Brinker Harding is City
council member for District six. I worked with him quite
often when I was Mayor of Omaha, which is my
former job with the city, and this morning we wanted
to talk a little bit about the front article in
the World Herald yesterday that council member Festerson is proposing
(04:05):
TIFF projects that are awarded to developers should have affordable units. Now,
Brinker and I talked a little bit about this this
morning already, but typically I don't like to give my
opinion until I know all the details, and I will
admit I don't know all the details with this, and
I'm not sure what he is proposing. But typically historically
(04:27):
I have been against something like this because I have
talked to mayors in other cities where this has happened,
where there was a mandate that a certain amount of
affordable housing units had to be included in every development
project or they could not get incentives or other benefits
like TIFF. And we could talk about TIFF too. Tiff
is a development tool that we have by allowed by
(04:48):
state law. But typically what happens when there is a
mandate that developers will stop developing in that city and
they might go and develop and build in an other city.
The reason is developers have to have a return on
their investment and they are not going to build apartments
or they're not going to do of development if there
(05:09):
is a mandate in there that could possibly potentially disrupt
what they want to achieve, and that is they have
to have a return on their investment to go forward
and do this development. And we don't want that happening
in Omaha. So I know we talked many times about
is there other incentives that can be used? What is
other things that the city can do to encourage developers
(05:32):
with more affordable housing units? To make it a mandate
that is still something that I think I would not support.
So Bricker, welcome, Good morning, Jane. I'm pretty chatty here.
All Okay, you can call me whatever you want. I
said on this show I've been called a lot worse.
There are people that still call me mayor, and that's okay.
(05:53):
As you know, you earn that title forever, once, always, once, always,
just like the President, I still call held out mayor
job whenever I call mayor fahee mayor. I called Jim
Subtle mayor when I see him. But people can call
me what really whatever they want. But most people call
me Gene and I like that.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
That's my name.
Speaker 4 (06:10):
Well, it's good to see you, and uh, I think, uh,
this radio show has been fantastic. I've had a chance
to listen to it from time to time. This is actually,
I think your one week anniversary.
Speaker 1 (06:22):
Oh it is, yes, it is. Oh boy, I've been
doing five days. I've been doing this already. And Scott
said yesterday that he was weaning me off of him.
I don't know what he really means by that, but
I think, yeah, Peyton and I we can handle this.
So here, Scott is here this morning, so he's he's
roaming around. But so I just wanted to ask you.
Speaker 2 (06:42):
You know.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
Brinker is a city council member for District six, which
is West Omaha. He is also a candidate for congressional
District two. So he's a candidate right now. He works
for callers. That's your real job. Well, yeah, that's your
real job. So he knows a lot about development in
real estate in the city of Omaha. So, Brinker, I
don't know if you know any more details about Council
(07:05):
Infesterson's proposal, but I kind of would love to know
what your thoughts are right now.
Speaker 4 (07:10):
Well, you kind of hit a lot of those same
thoughts and feelings I have about mandating something like that.
I mean, right now, I think you know, whatever estimates
you look at, if we have a thirty thousand unit
shortage of housing in the Omaha area, the metropolitan area,
I mean something like this is to me, it's a
(07:31):
show pony.
Speaker 2 (07:32):
It doesn't really mean that much.
Speaker 4 (07:35):
It doesn't accomplish anything other than you know, for example,
if it's a if you mandate the multifamily development that
was requesting, Tiff, put ten percent of the units in
for affordable housing. Again, if it's one hundred and eighty units,
that's eighteen units. If we have a thirty thousand shortage
(07:58):
in affordable housing, I think eighteen units really doesn't do
much to make a mark in that So I would
really encourage us to look at some of the things
that you suggested, maybe some other incentives or other ways
that we can encourage developers to do affordable housing, both
(08:19):
in the single unit housing units as well as multifamily.
But this really doesn't mean again, I think it's kind
of a show pony. It really doesn't do much to accomplish,
you know, really addressing the issue that we have at hand.
I find it interesting too that, well two things. One
(08:42):
that this resolution is being put on our agenda for
next Tuesday. Actually Amy Melton and I are both out
of it, won't be at the meeting next week.
Speaker 1 (08:55):
Oh that's interesting.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
Kind of interesting. I'm sure it's not once a day,
but it may be it maybe.
Speaker 4 (09:02):
But I also think it's interesting too, is we're talking
about affordability, and I think, you know, you and I
might talk a little bit about the Housing Affordability Action Plan.
But you know, we had an opportunity just a month
or two ago. And actually when you were still in office,
you remember the electrical code the state had adopted and
(09:25):
there were some amendments in the electrical code and then
the city has to adopt a code to be compliant
with the state now they can do something that is
the same as a state, or more restrictive than state,
which is what the council tried to do. They tried
to add back in those amendments that were taken out.
It passed at that time four to three. Amy, Milton
(09:47):
don Roe and I voted against it. And I'll say
why here in a minute, and then you vetoed it.
They did not have the votes to override the veto.
And then after the new administration's in they brought U
because we still had to be in compliance with the state,
and it passed four to three, and this time there's
no veto, so it went into effect. Now why is
(10:08):
that important because as we're talking about housing affordability and
something that surfesorson could have voted for something that would
make housing more affordable. Is that for every thousand dollars
that you add to the cost of a house at
the time when it was in front of us, when
(10:29):
you were in Indian when you were the mayor, we
were told that it took out four hundred and fifty
potential home buyers. When it came back to us this
last time, just eight months later, that number had jumped
to five hundred and fifty and now in discussions with
some of the homebuilders and homehall area border realtors and
(10:49):
other subject matter experts, it's over a thousand. So by
adding again and what we were what they added back in,
you could you know, there were estimates of what it was,
but at the bare minimum it was like eight hundred
dollars to you know, maybe two thousand dollars. That takes
out people being able to afford a home.
Speaker 1 (11:11):
It makes homes less affordable, and that's exactly what we
are trying to address right now. It sounded good because
it was the unions that were really pushing this in
the Electrical Union, and it sounded good, and that was
all about Their big push was it's all about safety.
(11:31):
But at the same time, our codes are safe as
they are, and when we were trying to debate something
that was going to make building a house or buying
a house more expensive, you know, we're just doing the
opposite of what we are trying to achieve. And that's
why I vetoed it. Now it doesn't surprise me at
all how it came back again. I always hated those
(11:52):
four to three votes, you know, and that's just the
way it is. You have four Democrats, you have three
Republicans on this city Council, and that's just the way
it goes a lot of the times. The vote is
the vote. That's what I mean. The majority rules here.
But I always hate it when it comes back and
they passed by such a slight margin. That means there
(12:13):
are people that really don't want to go forward with that.
The HAT plan I wanted to bring up, we call
it hap HAAP. It's Housing Affordability Affordable Action Plan that
was created in twenty twenty two when I was mayor
by the Planning Department, and you know, the goal was
(12:34):
is to have a plan to have more affordable housing units.
But I think that there was about ten percent of
affordable housing in the past five years that were considered
affordable with that plan. But I thought we had a
good plan in line. And we do have a partner.
The City of Omaha works with Front Porch, and I
mean they have put in a lot of money to
help developers, give them an incentive to build more affordable
(12:59):
housing units, but to mandate and to say that we
will not award tiff projects, which you know, and we
follow what the state law says with tiff. Tiff isn't
hard for people to understand, but I always go back
to that phrase within the state law that is called
the butt for phrase, and that means when somebody applies
(13:23):
for tiff for a development, they go through a tiff
committee before it goes to the city council, and that
tiff committee makes sure that they are tiff eligible expenses
that are awarded, and that also they satisfied the butt for.
If they didn't get tiff, they weren't going to do it, basically,
And I always give the example with tiff of say
(13:45):
we have an old vacant filling station, gas station on
a corner somewhere. It's vacant, and say it's worth I'm
going to make up a number, say it's worth one
hundred thousand dollars, and that owner is going to pay
property taxes on a hundhundred thousand dollars and he will
continue doing it. A developer comes in and he says,
(14:05):
I'm going to develop this area. I want to buy it,
I'm going to develop it. I'm going to put in
three hundred apartments here. When that development is done, let's
say it's worth ten million dollars. Then that developer is
going to be paying property taxes on ten million dollars
instead of one hundred thousand dollars. But that developer is
going to say, I can't afford to do this without TIFF,
(14:28):
and he will satisfy the butt for then if we
don't get TIFF, then that means he's not going to
develop it, and that old vacant gas station is still
going to sit there and still getting taxes paid on
one hundred thousand dollars. The way TIFF works then is
the city and the city council will award them that
the tax increment financing based on what is allowed by
(14:50):
state law, and as the value of that property goes
up and up, that new owner is going to pay
those additional taxes going up and up. The the city
then will basically return some of that money to the
developer of what was a proof for TIFF eligible expenses
to pay for the development. That's how it works. And
you know, the school districts aren't losing any money when
(15:14):
we award TIFF because they're not going to lose anything
they don't have. Don't you agree with me with that?
I mean it's really hard.
Speaker 4 (15:20):
It's alone essentially it's a it's a loan to the developer.
And to kind of bring it back to the article
that was in the paper yesterday, I actually hosted a
business roundtable luncheon yesterday with a number of developers, real
estate attorneys, architects, engineers, and this actually the subject came up.
(15:42):
And as you mentioned, there are other cities that you
talked to, and you know, there are other examples where
it helped it stemied some of the development and some
of the developers I was talking to yesterday said the
same thing. I find it interesting too, and I don't
know everything that uh Pete has in his resolution, but
(16:04):
in the article it mentioned that, well maybe they could
instead of having the affordable units within the project, they
could do a payment in lieu of tax.
Speaker 2 (16:13):
Well, you just brought up that the BUTT four.
Speaker 4 (16:16):
Okay, if if there's if they've proven the BUTT four
and and you're having then to pay out more cash
as if you're not doing the affordable units within it,
then that seems to work against the BUTT four. Then
you're saying, well, I have extra money, so I didn't
(16:37):
need to do it, yeah, or I could do it
without yeah, And that's what the whole debate is usually
and even some of the folks, our legislators were debating
with me when we decided to fund the street car
by using TIFF, and you know, they would say, well,
these all these this is going to happen, All this
development around the streetcar line is going to happen anyway,
(17:00):
So the schools would not get this additional property tax
because of all this development.
Speaker 1 (17:06):
No, they wouldn't around the streetcar these developments, and we
have probably now about one and a half billion dollars
worth of new developments that have either underway or already
or approved along the streetcar line and more in line.
And they're there because of the streetcar. I remember when
I did the press conference with Todd, heasted with new
(17:28):
style for Central Park Plaza, which are the two twin
towers downstairs, which is now going to be called Oh
remind me the duo that's right, do a clever name
because of the twin towers. And he said, I would
not be doing this development without TIFF. Now, this was
this building, although it looks pretty cool and I think
(17:49):
you all know what it is. It's at the end
of the gene Lehi Mal. It was about seventy five
percent vacant Class B office space soon to be one
hundred percent vacant. Todd, he said, is coming in and
he is building seven hundred and seven apartments. Some are affordable,
but he said, I could not do this without Tiff.
Without Tiff, he would not be doing that, and that
(18:10):
would be sitting there as a huge vacant building. So
Tiff is used very, very carefully.
Speaker 4 (18:15):
I wanted to mention one other thing too, as it
relates to affordability. There's a group in Omaha called Welcome
Home that did a study, and that study found that
the cost of a newly constructed home there's about anywhere
from twenty four to thirty two percent or tied up
(18:36):
in regulations. Now, I'm not saying that all regulations can
go away, but what we need to do, what we
need to focus on, is eliminating those onerous or burdensome
regulations that are needlessly adding to the cost of construction
of homes. Absolutely, there are a number of a number
of ways that we can attack the affordability issue, and
(18:59):
I don't think it's solved by Again, you know, eighteen
units out of one hundred and eighty unit apartment complex
multifamily development that's going to really put a dent into
the thirty thousand shortage that we have here in the
metropolitan area.
Speaker 1 (19:14):
Like we said, it sounds good on the surface, maybe,
but we always have to be worried about the unintended consequences,
and this is one of the unintended consequences. It's just
going to make it's I know, it's going to drive
development out. And you know, these developers, like I said,
they know what they are doing. I had people ask
me over and over what may or why are you
(19:35):
letting all these developers build all those apartments. They fill
up as quick as they're open. The developers know where
there's there the need is those apartments and the condos
they fill up right away, and they know what they're doing.
But they have to have a return on their investment.
They have to afford to be able to build those things.
I did want to give one more shout out to
Front Porch. I mentioned them earlier that that has been
(19:58):
our partner that I have wor worked with a lot.
They are great. I mean, they do a great job.
They are are a nonprofit It was established in twenty
twenty one. They provide low cost loans to builders that
help subsidize the cost of constructing housing and making the
units more affordable for those at lower income level. And
they do a great job doing that, and we have
(20:19):
a great partnership with them, so you know, and they
have been responsible for probably close to two thousand, maybe
more housing units that are considered affordable. But then we
always have that debate on what is affordable and what
does that mean. And we talked about that the other day,
but I thought it was important to have you on
because it's going to be a city council debate. It
(20:39):
was on the front page of the newspaper. And like
I told everybody the other day, it sounds good. It
made front page, sounds good on the surface, but we always,
the mayor and the city council always has to look
at the unintended consequences. Now I have to bring this
up because affordable housing is Mayor ewings Number one priority
(21:00):
as mayor. I have said this before and I'm going
to say it again. Government's priority, and every mayor's priority
in the country should be public safety. It should be
keeping the citizens of Omaha safe. That is not even
on his list of priorities. My second priority was the
budget in keeping taxes as low as possible, and that
(21:20):
is not on his list of priorities either. Number one
is affordable housing. Hold your mayor accountable. That's all I'm saying.
You make up your own mind. You make up your
own mind if you agree with him or not. But
hold him accountable, just like you held me accountable, just
like you hold the city council accountable.
Speaker 4 (21:36):
So thinking is say the city speech tomorrow too, So
we'll see some of those.
Speaker 1 (21:42):
I'm going to be listening to the state of the
city because you know what, when the budget we did
his first budget speech, and I have to just say
this because it's the truth. A lot of it was
my last budget speech that Kerrie Murphy and I wrote verbatim,
so it was they used a lot that I gave
in my last budget speech. So we will see how
the state of the city is tomorrow. And you know what,
(22:04):
Peyton Monday, we're going to talk about the.
Speaker 3 (22:06):
State of the city. That would be an excellent idea.
That would be an excellent idea. This week a kfab
comment line on news radio eleven ten KFAB reach out
to us via email comment at kfab dot com. The
radio talkback mic on your iHeartRadio app, or you can
give us a call for zero two five five eight
eleven ten. We'll be back in just a few minutes.
Speaker 1 (22:26):
Thanks Brinker for being on.
Speaker 2 (22:27):
Thank you, Mayor.
Speaker 3 (22:28):
Hi Larry, thank you for calling news radio eleven ten
KFAB you're talking to Genes author.
Speaker 5 (22:33):
Hi Larry, Yeah, thank you for taking my call. I'd
like to ask you your impression of the open meeting
that stat statute and that relates to the way the
city council opened operates right now. I go there every week.
I'm about the only non connected citizen that's not on
(22:55):
the agenda but attends. And it seems to me that
they do every thing they can to structure their rules
to limit the citizens that are not there for that.
They are not on the agenda, they're not there for
a handout, they're there to participate, that they do everything
(23:16):
they can to restrict the participation.
Speaker 1 (23:19):
Well, Larry, you know, first of all, I'm going to
tell you I'm really glad citizens like you do attend
these public meetings. People have a lot to say about
what goes on at city Hall, about the decisions the
mayor makes, the decisions the city council makes, but very
few actually come to the meeting to really listen, so
we appreciate that. And I'm going to let Brinker say
(23:40):
a few things about this too, but I will say this,
we follow We follow Robert's rules of order. We follow
parliamentary procedure. We have a city Clerk there that is
supposed to maintain the parliamentary procedure and the city attorney
and make sure that the rules are followed. But it
does have a lot to do with who is the
(24:00):
president of the council and who is running the meeting.
It has a whole lot to do with that. You know,
Chris Jerrem when he was President of the City Council,
he ran a very tight, strict meeting and he restricted
the time anybody had to speak. Pete Festerson typically did
not and let people talk as long as they want.
(24:23):
Danny Bagley, I think he is enforcing the rules. Are
Robert's rules a little bit further? Brinker, what you said
they are through this? What do you think?
Speaker 4 (24:31):
Well, yeah, we obviously welcome public's input on any item,
and everyone is afforded the same opportunity, everyone's treated the same.
You get three minutes on the subject, and we asked
that you stay on the subject, and if you wander
off the subject, then the President Danny usually make sure
(24:56):
that he tries to bring them back on subject, and
if they don't then then they're cut off.
Speaker 1 (25:01):
And Breaker. You can still if somebody has a bigger issue,
they can still give you a written testimony, are a
written opinion or a written concern and give it to
the clerk and it would be shared with all city councils.
Speaker 4 (25:18):
Yeah, and it's made a part of the permanent record
as well too. There and certainly if and again, look,
we also offer the opportunity for people to zoom in
with comments. They have to register with the Quirk obviously,
so that can be coordinated. But look, we encourage people
to voice their opinions.
Speaker 2 (25:37):
We listen to them.
Speaker 4 (25:38):
People can email us and as you said, they if
they have written testimony, if they can't be there that day,
they can cert and even if they are there that day,
they can hand it to the clerk. She will make
it part of the permanent record. So we do encourage
the public's input and we do listen to the public's input.
Speaker 1 (25:55):
And Breaker remind of folks if they want to come
to the city Council meeting. Do they have to sign
up to speak? And then also what is available now
for those that are hard at hearing, because if I recall, right,
I know and I don't know Larry, And again Larry,
thanks for calling. Larry does have some some challenges with hearing.
What's going on?
Speaker 4 (26:16):
Yeah, we we do offer a couple of different opportunities
for people to view and take part in the meeting.
There are headphones that they can have from the I
believe it's from the Building Commission. Uh, and and we
have some the what is it that KROI I want
(26:38):
to say, it's Kroy to cross a bottom?
Speaker 2 (26:39):
Yeah, I know it. Yeah, the close captioning close caption.
Speaker 1 (26:42):
There we go. It took both of us to think
of that, but.
Speaker 2 (26:46):
So we have.
Speaker 4 (26:46):
You know, we have those opportunities, but we want to
make sure that the public has every opportunity to weigh
in and give us their opinions. And again, they can
contact us by email, they can call city council offices.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
Do they have to sign up to speak before they
walk into the chamber?
Speaker 4 (27:04):
You know, I think they sometimes, especially if it's a
controversial or a subject that's going to have a lot
of people there to testify. I think they do asset.
I don't think that you necessarily have to. I think
it's encouraged that just so that the court can know
about how much, you know, how many people are there
to testify it.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
And the one thing we do ask, I know you
all ask, is if they come up to speak, it
has to be germane to that subject.
Speaker 2 (27:30):
They yes, yea.
Speaker 1 (27:32):
I think that's very important. If they're talking about a
liquor license, are a development and they want to speak,
that is fine, They're welcome, but it has to be
related to that topic. Absolutely, and that's when I think
that's when a lot of times the President of the
Council will stop and say, hold on, this is what
we're talking about. This is the issue right now, and
that happens a lot. So thank you, thanks Breaker for
(27:53):
your two cents there. I know Brinker's got to run,
but we are here to take more of your calls.
And Peyton, do you another email another call?
Speaker 3 (28:01):
Yes, I absolutely do, and thank you for joining us
as well today. So I have this one related for you.
This is this is in regards to Tiff Okay, yes,
and this one here is from a sports economics professor
at the University of Nebraska, Omaha, Okay, considering in her class,
they are considering the cost benefit analysis of the Omaha
(28:24):
Union Soccer Stadium. We've learned any area called a district
is code for proposed TIFF support. Does the city publish
details of proposed projects like these? And this might just
be a simple answer, but I thought it might be
good to know.
Speaker 1 (28:39):
Details about projects like these once the details are available
and available to the council and they're not still in
discussion these these Yeah, absolutely, I mean I did. I
can't tell you how many press conferences that I did
with developers over new developments from Central Park Plaza downtown,
from the the Riverfront parks to all the way out
(29:02):
at one hundred and forty fourth and Dodge talking about
Heartwood Preserve. I mean, I've done many many press conferences
that I was there to answer any questions that the
media had and to show the details of a development
like that. The thing with the soccer stadium, and I
started working with Union Soccer a lot while I was
still there, is that I thought that soccer stadium would
(29:25):
be fabulous. I thought it is needed downtown, It needed
to be downtown, But it was We worked with them
to find the right spot downtown. And you know, this
is going to be not just a soccer stadium, but
what unions the soccer stadium in itself originally. And I
might have this figure a little bit wrong now it
might be totally different. But if I recall the soccer
(29:46):
stadium was maybe seventy to eighty million dollars for the
soccer stadium. Maybe I'm a little high on that. But
the district around there, which is going to be restaurants
and hotels, et cetera, that was going to be over
a three hundred million dollar district. And you've got to
stop and think of the benefit to the city for that.
(30:06):
There's going to be a lot more sales tax that
are going to come out of that district. But they
wouldn't be building it downtown if it wasn't for the
incentives that we are giving them. And so, you know,
because they've got they got to get their return on
their investment. But I wanted them downtown. Same thing with
Mutual of Omaha. Mutual of Omaha could have been built
(30:28):
out in Western Omaha and built some sort of a
campus out there at much less costs than they are,
but a fortune five hundred company. I felt and my
team felt needed to be downtown Omaha to really enhance
our sky skyline now and in the future. So those
details should be readily available once they are final.
Speaker 3 (30:49):
I'm gonna be honest. I'm a soccer guy. We talked
about this earlier. I'm so excited for it. In my
mind too. There's not a single bad thing about that place. No,
I can't wait.
Speaker 1 (30:57):
It's going to be great. And you know they're working
with state on turnback text two, which used to be
only around a given awarded around arena or convention center.
But we're working with the state on that too. But
you got to think again, the return on that investment.
We want them down there. They've got a spot that
they want to build. Obviously, like I said, I've been
(31:19):
the way for about eight months. I believe that's approved
right now. But what an addition to downtown. And you know,
people love soccer. I'm a soccer mom. I was telling Peyton,
my son played from kindergarten through college. So I think
it's just going to be another great addition to downtown
and it's going to bring more people downtown. It's going
(31:41):
to bring more revenue that's coming in for all over
the city. I had so many people say, well, I
don't like soccer, I'm never gonna I'm never going to
go to a soccer game. Why do I care if
there's a soccer stadium downtown. But you got to understand
the revenue that comes in from these big developments. It's
good for all of Omaha. It's just bringing in more
sales tax and more revenue. Sales tax is the number
(32:03):
one source of revenue for the city of Omaha. It's
sales tax, followed by property tax, followed by restaurant tax.
And we're going to get into that one day too.
Speaker 3 (32:13):
Yes, a lot of people are are interested about that,
and we can get into that too.
Speaker 1 (32:16):
But thanks for your thanks for your message. That was
that we're talking about.
Speaker 3 (32:20):
Absolutely, We're going to go to one caller here. This
is Dan Dan, thank you for calling News Radio eleven
ten KFAB. You're on with Jean Stouthart.
Speaker 6 (32:30):
Yeah, I just got a question. I live right pretty
much drive by the hospital, pretty nice area, but you
go anywhere south from that the parking and the crash,
what's going on with that? I know, I thought at
one time there was a law of that or they're
trying to make them all where you can't park there.
I understand when you have thirty people lived in a
(32:51):
house were five, you got to park somewhere, but that
is getting awful. It's got to be eyes or for
the for the neighborhoods. It's just driving me crazy size
kind of wondering what.
Speaker 4 (33:05):
Right.
Speaker 1 (33:05):
Thanks for the call, and you know, I'm not I'm
not sure specifically the area you're talking about, but I
assume you're talking about the housing area south of the
VA Hospital and you know, and which which really is
part of the South Omaha, which it is considered South Omaha,
And you know, for quite a while now, the councilman
that represents that area has been pondering some sort of
(33:29):
city ordinance that prevents people from parking in their yards.
The problem is where else are they gonna park? And
you know, a lot of those streets in that area
are older streets, they're narrower streets, some don't have sidewalks,
some don't have curbs. So the challenge for the city
(33:49):
council and the mayor is if there is going to
be an ordinance to prevent parking in yards, then again
we've got to look at how it is going to
be managed, in how it is going to be enforced.
I mean, if you see somebody parking in the yard,
is the next step to call the Omaha Police Department
to come out. What kind of punishment goes along with that?
(34:11):
Some housing there is no place to park but on
the street, and that's why they end up parking in
the yards. And I know it doesn't The whole issue
is it looks bad if you're in a neighborhood and
you've got a pickup truck or a car or whatever
parked in somebody's front yard.
Speaker 3 (34:26):
Well, one thing we talked about a few months ago,
this was in the news as well. But who's to
stop me from just parking in my front yard?
Speaker 5 (34:34):
Right?
Speaker 3 (34:34):
Who's to stop me? It's my yard right right?
Speaker 1 (34:37):
Well right now? It could be stopped if you live
in an area where there's an HOA, a homeowner's association.
Homeowners association always have by laws that the incovenants that
apply to that area you're living.
Speaker 3 (34:51):
And where I live, I.
Speaker 1 (34:53):
Always say I live about one hundred and twenty. I think, Hugh,
that's where I live. We have an HOA, and they
not only say you can't park in your yard. But
they're saying you can't have an RV in your driveway,
and you can't paint your house bright purple, and you
have to have a certain kind of roof.
Speaker 3 (35:06):
Do they tell you what to eat for dinner too.
Speaker 1 (35:08):
Well, no, they don't go that far, but they do
have covenants. I mean, I put up a fence in
my backyard a few years ago, and I had to
get permission to put up the fence from the homeowners' association.
So if you live in an area with a homeowners
association or a neighborhood association, they are the ones that
sometimes can prohibit that parking. But like I said, in
(35:30):
South Omaha, some of these older neighborhoods, it is to
be a real challenge because there sometimes there is no
place to park. So I understand your concern. It is
something that the city council is considering.
Speaker 3 (35:42):
Thank you for the call, Dan, We appreciate it. There's
one thing that we mentioned that you mentioned to me,
excuse me, that you wanted to talk about, So we're
gonna go to break here, we're gonna come back and
talk about that. And there's also a few callers that
have reached out about the restaurant tax Oh, I love it.
That up next, I love talking about it. You are
host of the show, g Stouther. I'm your producer Peyton Hilock,
(36:03):
and I got a good one for you here, Gene. Okay,
I'm ready this one. In Sunday's Omaha World, Harold, there's
an article on Mark Martinez not being able to run
for Douglas County Sheriff. The last paragraph of the article
stated that former Mayor Jean Stouth, according to Mark Martinez,
his campaign endorses Mark since the court has ruled that
(36:25):
Mark can run for Douglas County Sheriff. Who are you, Gene,
endorsing and why?
Speaker 1 (36:31):
Well, Number one, I'm not endorsing anyone at this point.
But that article, and I was gonna call the World, Harold,
I could tell you, I'm going to paraphrase exactly what
it said, and it was misleading, and it was and
a lot of people asked me about it and were
misled by it. So, first of all, I have not
and will not endorse Mark Martinez. Okay, So that is out.
(36:54):
What the article said is it said that Tom Warren
has endorsed Mark Martinez. So the way it said it.
It said Tom Warren, former chief or. It said Tom Warren,
chief of staff for Mayor John Ewing, and former Mayor
Jean Stothard has also endorsed Mark Martinez. What it meant
(37:17):
was Tom Warren was my chief of staff and John
Ewing's chief of staff, and Tom Warren endorsed Mark Martinez.
But the way it was written, my name was last
and right after it said and Jean Stothard also endorsed
Mark Martinez. So that was not that is not true,
and it was it was worded poorly by the World Harold,
(37:39):
but a lot of people misread it. And I was
going to make an attempt to ask the World Harold
to rephrase it. But I have asked the World Harold
many times to rephrase things and they don't do it.
So I just want to make that really clear. I
have not endorsed him. When I read it at first,
I had to read it twice. But the paragraph starts
out with Tom Warren. Tom Warren was the subject of
(38:00):
that paragraph. He's the one that endorsed Mark Martinez. I
when I heard about it at first, I immediately went
to mart Martinez's campaign Facebook and they had all his endorsements,
and they had Mary John Ewing, they had Tom Warren.
They did not have me on there. So you know,
you can look at what his endorsement page is. I'm
not on there, but no I did not, and I'm
(38:20):
so glad somebody called in and asked about it, because
that was misleading the way the World Herald wrote it.
Speaker 3 (38:26):
Yes, I agree, and again thank you for emailing out
and reaching out to us. This one now is restaurant tax.
We're switching lanes here.
Speaker 1 (38:33):
Oh do we have like three hours?
Speaker 3 (38:36):
I know, right, I mean I look down at the
clock and it's over our right.
Speaker 1 (38:39):
We can bring this back tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (38:40):
But go ahead, we can.
Speaker 3 (38:41):
Bring it back tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (38:42):
But here I go.
Speaker 3 (38:42):
I know this is an old issue, but I have
this comment. We were very disappointed that this was supposed
to be a temporary tax. But then of course it
was never removed.
Speaker 1 (38:51):
It was never a temporary tax, and that is a
rumor out there, and that is not true. You could
go on the City of Omaha web page. You could
look and read every ordinance that the City of Omaha
has ever passed. The restaurant tax was passed in twenty ten.
It was never supposed to be temporary. Nothing in that
(39:11):
ordinance says anything about it being temporary. And also the
restaurant tax is two and a half percent. That is
the third largest amount of revenue the city gets. When
I was running for mayor the first time, I said
I wanted to get rid of our lower the subtle
tax increases. Subtle raised both property tax and impose the
(39:35):
restaurant tax. When I got in office, the restaurant tax
was bringing in so much revenue the first year, twice
as much was originally estimated it would bring in. Do
you know how much the restaurant tax is bringing in now,
almost fifty million a year. Can you imagine if we.
Speaker 3 (39:50):
Took get some of that.
Speaker 1 (39:51):
Yeah, at fifty million out of the general fund, that
is a huge chunk. It would be financially irresponsible to
get rid of it now. But it was never supposed
to be temporary. It is a occupation tax also, and
all occupation taxes by law going to the general fund.
It's dumped into the general fund, just like sales tax
(40:12):
and property taxes are, and that general fund goes to
fund every city department. It was also never meant just
to go into the fire and police pension and This
is what we could talk about a lot. And I
want Jim Rose on my show sometime because he always
brings that up. It was always supposed to go into
fire and police pension, and we could talk at linked
about that at another show.
Speaker 3 (40:34):
I know, there's always so much to talk about, and
you look down at the clock and the show's over.
Speaker 1 (40:38):
Time flies.
Speaker 3 (40:39):
When you're having fun, the show's over. But we had
some good callers today, good emails. I just like hearing
about the city.
Speaker 1 (40:45):
And I do too, And you know what, we welcome everybody.
Please keep on listening and I'll take all your call,
like I said, or your email. Anything goes. I'm happy
to talk about what your issues are, your concerns, your
issues are, just to make a statement. Please keep on
call and we I love being here. This is great.
I am your current host of this great show that
we have just started the last week. For the ten
to eleven hour, I was going to say I just
used to work for the City of Omaha instead of
going through all those things that I used to do.
But I want to hear the listeners feedback, your comments,
your concerns, your complaints. Really anything goes on this show,
whether it's city, state, national, or the world. And of
(00:22):
course you will get plenty of opinions from me, Jean
stother but it's your chance to speak up and sound off.
So you can send your emails and you to your
emails to comments. Comment at kfab dot com. Just comment,
not comments, although you can comments and then or you
can call four two, five, five, eight eleven ten. Before
(00:45):
we get into today's show, I did want to give
a little additional information. One of the callers yesterday I
hope you're still listening, called in about the traffic signals
and the timing of the traffic signals, and I said,
I experienced the same thing everybody else does. It is
for us, but we are and I talked a little
bit about the plan that we have and it is
called the Signal Master Plan, and it is about eighty
(01:08):
five percent complete right now. I said public Works yesterday
controls the signal timing, and it is traffic engineering manages
the signal timing under public Works. But just a little
more information. Some of our quarters are coordinated to limit
the stops in a queue, but eventually the drivers will
(01:29):
have to stop. But still it's being done for smooth sailing.
Like I said, as you go east in the morning
and west in the afternoon. The goal is really to
manage intersection traffic as efficiently as possible while allowing phases
at all legs without too long of a wait. So
we can observe this now also with cameras and sometimes
(01:50):
we use drones, particularly at rush hour. But this is important.
If anyone submits a request because they think an intersection
isn't properly working right, then we will evaluate it. So
I want the listeners to understand that, so you can
call in. You can call the MARES hotline at four
four four five five five five and request that, or
you can call public Works. One other comment I wanted
(02:12):
to make is when I made a comment yesterday that
I was actually mistaken, so I will always miss I
always admit my mistakes, but I said, we are working
with Hawkins Construction to have hot asphalt all year round.
And I said, we were still using the coal patch. Actually,
Hawkins asphalt plant has been up and running for just
(02:33):
about a year now and they have provided hot asphalt
over the winter this year, so the hot asphalt is
available early on, I said yesterday. Usually our asphalt plant
doesn't fire up until April, but we do have it now.
And thank you to Hawkins Construction. Very good that they
were working with the city to provide this so those
do last those patches a little bit longer. And this
(02:55):
was in a conversation about my favorite subject, potholes, every
mayor's nightmare. But Peyton is here with me again today.
Good morning, Peyton, Good morning Gina.
Speaker 2 (03:05):
Good to be with you.
Speaker 1 (03:06):
Thank you me too. It's good to see you too.
Peyton is a former soccer player. We had a lot
of talk about that yesterday because my son was a
soccer player too. And I see I heard you this morning.
You gave the disclaimer after Chris Baker commercial and you're
really catching on at that because you did all that.
Speaker 3 (03:23):
Yes, just in case anybody's curious, I do not talk
that fast. They speed it up in production. Oh do
they Because I heard it my son. I was like,
I did not talk like that, but it sounds really good.
Speaker 1 (03:36):
I know you got it, I said. I always think
those disclaimers sound so crazy when they go and that's
what you were.
Speaker 2 (03:41):
Doing this morning.
Speaker 1 (03:42):
So I have a guest to start out this morning.
Brink Harding is here with me. Brinker Harding is City
council member for District six. I worked with him quite
often when I was Mayor of Omaha, which is my
former job with the city, and this morning we wanted
to talk a little bit about the front article in
the World Herald yesterday that council member Festerson is proposing
(04:05):
TIFF projects that are awarded to developers should have affordable units. Now,
Brinker and I talked a little bit about this this
morning already, but typically I don't like to give my
opinion until I know all the details, and I will
admit I don't know all the details with this, and
I'm not sure what he is proposing. But typically historically
(04:27):
I have been against something like this because I have
talked to mayors in other cities where this has happened,
where there was a mandate that a certain amount of
affordable housing units had to be included in every development
project or they could not get incentives or other benefits
like TIFF. And we could talk about TIFF too. Tiff
is a development tool that we have by allowed by
(04:48):
state law. But typically what happens when there is a
mandate that developers will stop developing in that city and
they might go and develop and build in an other city.
The reason is developers have to have a return on
their investment and they are not going to build apartments
or they're not going to do of development if there
(05:09):
is a mandate in there that could possibly potentially disrupt
what they want to achieve, and that is they have
to have a return on their investment to go forward
and do this development. And we don't want that happening
in Omaha. So I know we talked many times about
is there other incentives that can be used? What is
other things that the city can do to encourage developers
(05:32):
with more affordable housing units? To make it a mandate
that is still something that I think I would not support.
So Bricker, welcome, Good morning, Jane. I'm pretty chatty here.
All Okay, you can call me whatever you want. I
said on this show I've been called a lot worse.
There are people that still call me mayor, and that's okay.
(05:53):
As you know, you earn that title forever, once, always, once, always,
just like the President, I still call held out mayor
job whenever I call mayor fahee mayor. I called Jim
Subtle mayor when I see him. But people can call
me what really whatever they want. But most people call
me Gene and I like that.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
That's my name.
Speaker 4 (06:10):
Well, it's good to see you, and uh, I think, uh,
this radio show has been fantastic. I've had a chance
to listen to it from time to time. This is actually,
I think your one week anniversary.
Speaker 1 (06:22):
Oh it is, yes, it is. Oh boy, I've been
doing five days. I've been doing this already. And Scott
said yesterday that he was weaning me off of him.
I don't know what he really means by that, but
I think, yeah, Peyton and I we can handle this.
So here, Scott is here this morning, so he's he's
roaming around. But so I just wanted to ask you.
Speaker 2 (06:42):
You know.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
Brinker is a city council member for District six, which
is West Omaha. He is also a candidate for congressional
District two. So he's a candidate right now. He works
for callers. That's your real job. Well, yeah, that's your
real job. So he knows a lot about development in
real estate in the city of Omaha. So, Brinker, I
don't know if you know any more details about Council
(07:05):
Infesterson's proposal, but I kind of would love to know
what your thoughts are right now.
Speaker 4 (07:10):
Well, you kind of hit a lot of those same
thoughts and feelings I have about mandating something like that.
I mean, right now, I think you know, whatever estimates
you look at, if we have a thirty thousand unit
shortage of housing in the Omaha area, the metropolitan area,
I mean something like this is to me, it's a
(07:31):
show pony.
Speaker 2 (07:32):
It doesn't really mean that much.
Speaker 4 (07:35):
It doesn't accomplish anything other than you know, for example,
if it's a if you mandate the multifamily development that
was requesting, Tiff, put ten percent of the units in
for affordable housing. Again, if it's one hundred and eighty units,
that's eighteen units. If we have a thirty thousand shortage
(07:58):
in affordable housing, I think eighteen units really doesn't do
much to make a mark in that So I would
really encourage us to look at some of the things
that you suggested, maybe some other incentives or other ways
that we can encourage developers to do affordable housing, both
(08:19):
in the single unit housing units as well as multifamily.
But this really doesn't mean again, I think it's kind
of a show pony. It really doesn't do much to accomplish,
you know, really addressing the issue that we have at hand.
I find it interesting too that, well two things. One
(08:42):
that this resolution is being put on our agenda for
next Tuesday. Actually Amy Melton and I are both out
of it, won't be at the meeting next week.
Speaker 1 (08:55):
Oh that's interesting.
Speaker 2 (08:57):
Kind of interesting. I'm sure it's not once a day,
but it may be it maybe.
Speaker 4 (09:02):
But I also think it's interesting too, is we're talking
about affordability, and I think, you know, you and I
might talk a little bit about the Housing Affordability Action Plan.
But you know, we had an opportunity just a month
or two ago. And actually when you were still in office,
you remember the electrical code the state had adopted and
(09:25):
there were some amendments in the electrical code and then
the city has to adopt a code to be compliant
with the state now they can do something that is
the same as a state, or more restrictive than state,
which is what the council tried to do. They tried
to add back in those amendments that were taken out.
It passed at that time four to three. Amy, Milton
(09:47):
don Roe and I voted against it. And I'll say
why here in a minute, and then you vetoed it.
They did not have the votes to override the veto.
And then after the new administration's in they brought U
because we still had to be in compliance with the state,
and it passed four to three, and this time there's
no veto, so it went into effect. Now why is
(10:08):
that important because as we're talking about housing affordability and
something that surfesorson could have voted for something that would
make housing more affordable. Is that for every thousand dollars
that you add to the cost of a house at
the time when it was in front of us, when
(10:29):
you were in Indian when you were the mayor, we
were told that it took out four hundred and fifty
potential home buyers. When it came back to us this
last time, just eight months later, that number had jumped
to five hundred and fifty and now in discussions with
some of the homebuilders and homehall area border realtors and
(10:49):
other subject matter experts, it's over a thousand. So by
adding again and what we were what they added back in,
you could you know, there were estimates of what it was,
but at the bare minimum it was like eight hundred
dollars to you know, maybe two thousand dollars. That takes
out people being able to afford a home.
Speaker 1 (11:11):
It makes homes less affordable, and that's exactly what we
are trying to address right now. It sounded good because
it was the unions that were really pushing this in
the Electrical Union, and it sounded good, and that was
all about Their big push was it's all about safety.
(11:31):
But at the same time, our codes are safe as
they are, and when we were trying to debate something
that was going to make building a house or buying
a house more expensive, you know, we're just doing the
opposite of what we are trying to achieve. And that's
why I vetoed it. Now it doesn't surprise me at
all how it came back again. I always hated those
(11:52):
four to three votes, you know, and that's just the
way it is. You have four Democrats, you have three
Republicans on this city Council, and that's just the way
it goes a lot of the times. The vote is
the vote. That's what I mean. The majority rules here.
But I always hate it when it comes back and
they passed by such a slight margin. That means there
(12:13):
are people that really don't want to go forward with that.
The HAT plan I wanted to bring up, we call
it hap HAAP. It's Housing Affordability Affordable Action Plan that
was created in twenty twenty two when I was mayor
by the Planning Department, and you know, the goal was
(12:34):
is to have a plan to have more affordable housing units.
But I think that there was about ten percent of
affordable housing in the past five years that were considered
affordable with that plan. But I thought we had a
good plan in line. And we do have a partner.
The City of Omaha works with Front Porch, and I
mean they have put in a lot of money to
help developers, give them an incentive to build more affordable
(12:59):
housing units, but to mandate and to say that we
will not award tiff projects, which you know, and we
follow what the state law says with tiff. Tiff isn't
hard for people to understand, but I always go back
to that phrase within the state law that is called
the butt for phrase, and that means when somebody applies
(13:23):
for tiff for a development, they go through a tiff
committee before it goes to the city council, and that
tiff committee makes sure that they are tiff eligible expenses
that are awarded, and that also they satisfied the butt for.
If they didn't get tiff, they weren't going to do it, basically,
And I always give the example with tiff of say
(13:45):
we have an old vacant filling station, gas station on
a corner somewhere. It's vacant, and say it's worth I'm
going to make up a number, say it's worth one
hundred thousand dollars, and that owner is going to pay
property taxes on a hundhundred thousand dollars and he will
continue doing it. A developer comes in and he says,
(14:05):
I'm going to develop this area. I want to buy it,
I'm going to develop it. I'm going to put in
three hundred apartments here. When that development is done, let's
say it's worth ten million dollars. Then that developer is
going to be paying property taxes on ten million dollars
instead of one hundred thousand dollars. But that developer is
going to say, I can't afford to do this without TIFF,
(14:28):
and he will satisfy the butt for then if we
don't get TIFF, then that means he's not going to
develop it, and that old vacant gas station is still
going to sit there and still getting taxes paid on
one hundred thousand dollars. The way TIFF works then is
the city and the city council will award them that
the tax increment financing based on what is allowed by
(14:50):
state law, and as the value of that property goes
up and up, that new owner is going to pay
those additional taxes going up and up. The the city
then will basically return some of that money to the
developer of what was a proof for TIFF eligible expenses
to pay for the development. That's how it works. And
you know, the school districts aren't losing any money when
(15:14):
we award TIFF because they're not going to lose anything
they don't have. Don't you agree with me with that?
I mean it's really hard.
Speaker 4 (15:20):
It's alone essentially it's a it's a loan to the developer.
And to kind of bring it back to the article
that was in the paper yesterday, I actually hosted a
business roundtable luncheon yesterday with a number of developers, real
estate attorneys, architects, engineers, and this actually the subject came up.
(15:42):
And as you mentioned, there are other cities that you
talked to, and you know, there are other examples where
it helped it stemied some of the development and some
of the developers I was talking to yesterday said the
same thing. I find it interesting too, and I don't
know everything that uh Pete has in his resolution, but
(16:04):
in the article it mentioned that, well maybe they could
instead of having the affordable units within the project, they
could do a payment in lieu of tax.
Speaker 2 (16:13):
Well, you just brought up that the BUTT four.
Speaker 4 (16:16):
Okay, if if there's if they've proven the BUTT four
and and you're having then to pay out more cash
as if you're not doing the affordable units within it,
then that seems to work against the BUTT four. Then
you're saying, well, I have extra money, so I didn't
(16:37):
need to do it, yeah, or I could do it
without yeah, And that's what the whole debate is usually
and even some of the folks, our legislators were debating
with me when we decided to fund the street car
by using TIFF, and you know, they would say, well,
these all these this is going to happen, All this
development around the streetcar line is going to happen anyway,
(17:00):
So the schools would not get this additional property tax
because of all this development.
Speaker 1 (17:06):
No, they wouldn't around the streetcar these developments, and we
have probably now about one and a half billion dollars
worth of new developments that have either underway or already
or approved along the streetcar line and more in line.
And they're there because of the streetcar. I remember when
I did the press conference with Todd, heasted with new
(17:28):
style for Central Park Plaza, which are the two twin
towers downstairs, which is now going to be called Oh
remind me the duo that's right, do a clever name
because of the twin towers. And he said, I would
not be doing this development without TIFF. Now, this was
this building, although it looks pretty cool and I think
(17:49):
you all know what it is. It's at the end
of the gene Lehi Mal. It was about seventy five
percent vacant Class B office space soon to be one
hundred percent vacant. Todd, he said, is coming in and
he is building seven hundred and seven apartments. Some are affordable,
but he said, I could not do this without Tiff.
Without Tiff, he would not be doing that, and that
(18:10):
would be sitting there as a huge vacant building. So
Tiff is used very, very carefully.
Speaker 4 (18:15):
I wanted to mention one other thing too, as it
relates to affordability. There's a group in Omaha called Welcome
Home that did a study, and that study found that
the cost of a newly constructed home there's about anywhere
from twenty four to thirty two percent or tied up
(18:36):
in regulations. Now, I'm not saying that all regulations can
go away, but what we need to do, what we
need to focus on, is eliminating those onerous or burdensome
regulations that are needlessly adding to the cost of construction
of homes. Absolutely, there are a number of a number
of ways that we can attack the affordability issue, and
(18:59):
I don't think it's solved by Again, you know, eighteen
units out of one hundred and eighty unit apartment complex
multifamily development that's going to really put a dent into
the thirty thousand shortage that we have here in the
metropolitan area.
Speaker 1 (19:14):
Like we said, it sounds good on the surface, maybe,
but we always have to be worried about the unintended consequences,
and this is one of the unintended consequences. It's just
going to make it's I know, it's going to drive
development out. And you know, these developers, like I said,
they know what they are doing. I had people ask
me over and over what may or why are you
(19:35):
letting all these developers build all those apartments. They fill
up as quick as they're open. The developers know where
there's there the need is those apartments and the condos
they fill up right away, and they know what they're doing.
But they have to have a return on their investment.
They have to afford to be able to build those things.
I did want to give one more shout out to
Front Porch. I mentioned them earlier that that has been
(19:58):
our partner that I have wor worked with a lot.
They are great. I mean, they do a great job.
They are are a nonprofit It was established in twenty
twenty one. They provide low cost loans to builders that
help subsidize the cost of constructing housing and making the
units more affordable for those at lower income level. And
they do a great job doing that, and we have
(20:19):
a great partnership with them, so you know, and they
have been responsible for probably close to two thousand, maybe
more housing units that are considered affordable. But then we
always have that debate on what is affordable and what
does that mean. And we talked about that the other day,
but I thought it was important to have you on
because it's going to be a city council debate. It
(20:39):
was on the front page of the newspaper. And like
I told everybody the other day, it sounds good. It
made front page, sounds good on the surface, but we always,
the mayor and the city council always has to look
at the unintended consequences. Now I have to bring this
up because affordable housing is Mayor ewings Number one priority
(21:00):
as mayor. I have said this before and I'm going
to say it again. Government's priority, and every mayor's priority
in the country should be public safety. It should be
keeping the citizens of Omaha safe. That is not even
on his list of priorities. My second priority was the
budget in keeping taxes as low as possible, and that
(21:20):
is not on his list of priorities either. Number one
is affordable housing. Hold your mayor accountable. That's all I'm saying.
You make up your own mind. You make up your
own mind if you agree with him or not. But
hold him accountable, just like you held me accountable, just
like you hold the city council accountable.
Speaker 4 (21:36):
So thinking is say the city speech tomorrow too, So
we'll see some of those.
Speaker 1 (21:42):
I'm going to be listening to the state of the
city because you know what, when the budget we did
his first budget speech, and I have to just say
this because it's the truth. A lot of it was
my last budget speech that Kerrie Murphy and I wrote verbatim,
so it was they used a lot that I gave
in my last budget speech. So we will see how
the state of the city is tomorrow. And you know what,
(22:04):
Peyton Monday, we're going to talk about the.
Speaker 3 (22:06):
State of the city. That would be an excellent idea.
That would be an excellent idea. This week a kfab
comment line on news radio eleven ten KFAB reach out
to us via email comment at kfab dot com. The
radio talkback mic on your iHeartRadio app, or you can
give us a call for zero two five five eight
eleven ten. We'll be back in just a few minutes.
Speaker 1 (22:26):
Thanks Brinker for being on.
Speaker 2 (22:27):
Thank you, Mayor.
Speaker 3 (22:28):
Hi Larry, thank you for calling news radio eleven ten
KFAB you're talking to Genes author.
Speaker 5 (22:33):
Hi Larry, Yeah, thank you for taking my call. I'd
like to ask you your impression of the open meeting
that stat statute and that relates to the way the
city council opened operates right now. I go there every week.
I'm about the only non connected citizen that's not on
(22:55):
the agenda but attends. And it seems to me that
they do every thing they can to structure their rules
to limit the citizens that are not there for that.
They are not on the agenda, they're not there for
a handout, they're there to participate, that they do everything
(23:16):
they can to restrict the participation.
Speaker 1 (23:19):
Well, Larry, you know, first of all, I'm going to
tell you I'm really glad citizens like you do attend
these public meetings. People have a lot to say about
what goes on at city Hall, about the decisions the
mayor makes, the decisions the city council makes, but very
few actually come to the meeting to really listen, so
we appreciate that. And I'm going to let Brinker say
(23:40):
a few things about this too, but I will say this,
we follow We follow Robert's rules of order. We follow
parliamentary procedure. We have a city Clerk there that is
supposed to maintain the parliamentary procedure and the city attorney
and make sure that the rules are followed. But it
does have a lot to do with who is the
(24:00):
president of the council and who is running the meeting.
It has a whole lot to do with that. You know,
Chris Jerrem when he was President of the City Council,
he ran a very tight, strict meeting and he restricted
the time anybody had to speak. Pete Festerson typically did
not and let people talk as long as they want.
(24:23):
Danny Bagley, I think he is enforcing the rules. Are
Robert's rules a little bit further? Brinker, what you said
they are through this? What do you think?
Speaker 4 (24:31):
Well, yeah, we obviously welcome public's input on any item,
and everyone is afforded the same opportunity, everyone's treated the same.
You get three minutes on the subject, and we asked
that you stay on the subject, and if you wander
off the subject, then the President Danny usually make sure
(24:56):
that he tries to bring them back on subject, and
if they don't then then they're cut off.
Speaker 1 (25:01):
And Breaker. You can still if somebody has a bigger issue,
they can still give you a written testimony, are a
written opinion or a written concern and give it to
the clerk and it would be shared with all city councils.
Speaker 4 (25:18):
Yeah, and it's made a part of the permanent record
as well too. There and certainly if and again, look,
we also offer the opportunity for people to zoom in
with comments. They have to register with the Quirk obviously,
so that can be coordinated. But look, we encourage people
to voice their opinions.
Speaker 2 (25:37):
We listen to them.
Speaker 4 (25:38):
People can email us and as you said, they if
they have written testimony, if they can't be there that day,
they can cert and even if they are there that day,
they can hand it to the clerk. She will make
it part of the permanent record. So we do encourage
the public's input and we do listen to the public's input.
Speaker 1 (25:55):
And Breaker remind of folks if they want to come
to the city Council meeting. Do they have to sign
up to speak? And then also what is available now
for those that are hard at hearing, because if I recall, right,
I know and I don't know Larry, And again Larry,
thanks for calling. Larry does have some some challenges with hearing.
What's going on?
Speaker 4 (26:16):
Yeah, we we do offer a couple of different opportunities
for people to view and take part in the meeting.
There are headphones that they can have from the I
believe it's from the Building Commission. Uh, and and we
have some the what is it that KROI I want
(26:38):
to say, it's Kroy to cross a bottom?
Speaker 2 (26:39):
Yeah, I know it. Yeah, the close captioning close caption.
Speaker 1 (26:42):
There we go. It took both of us to think
of that, but.
Speaker 2 (26:46):
So we have.
Speaker 4 (26:46):
You know, we have those opportunities, but we want to
make sure that the public has every opportunity to weigh
in and give us their opinions. And again, they can
contact us by email, they can call city council offices.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
Do they have to sign up to speak before they
walk into the chamber?
Speaker 4 (27:04):
You know, I think they sometimes, especially if it's a
controversial or a subject that's going to have a lot
of people there to testify. I think they do asset.
I don't think that you necessarily have to. I think
it's encouraged that just so that the court can know
about how much, you know, how many people are there
to testify it.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
And the one thing we do ask, I know you
all ask, is if they come up to speak, it
has to be germane to that subject.
Speaker 2 (27:30):
They yes, yea.
Speaker 1 (27:32):
I think that's very important. If they're talking about a
liquor license, are a development and they want to speak,
that is fine, They're welcome, but it has to be
related to that topic. Absolutely, and that's when I think
that's when a lot of times the President of the
Council will stop and say, hold on, this is what
we're talking about. This is the issue right now, and
that happens a lot. So thank you, thanks Breaker for
(27:53):
your two cents there. I know Brinker's got to run,
but we are here to take more of your calls.
And Peyton, do you another email another call?
Speaker 3 (28:01):
Yes, I absolutely do, and thank you for joining us
as well today. So I have this one related for you.
This is this is in regards to Tiff Okay, yes,
and this one here is from a sports economics professor
at the University of Nebraska, Omaha, Okay, considering in her class,
they are considering the cost benefit analysis of the Omaha
(28:24):
Union Soccer Stadium. We've learned any area called a district
is code for proposed TIFF support. Does the city publish
details of proposed projects like these? And this might just
be a simple answer, but I thought it might be
good to know.
Speaker 1 (28:39):
Details about projects like these once the details are available
and available to the council and they're not still in
discussion these these Yeah, absolutely, I mean I did. I
can't tell you how many press conferences that I did
with developers over new developments from Central Park Plaza downtown,
from the the Riverfront parks to all the way out
(29:02):
at one hundred and forty fourth and Dodge talking about
Heartwood Preserve. I mean, I've done many many press conferences
that I was there to answer any questions that the
media had and to show the details of a development
like that. The thing with the soccer stadium, and I
started working with Union Soccer a lot while I was
still there, is that I thought that soccer stadium would
(29:25):
be fabulous. I thought it is needed downtown, It needed
to be downtown, But it was We worked with them
to find the right spot downtown. And you know, this
is going to be not just a soccer stadium, but
what unions the soccer stadium in itself originally. And I
might have this figure a little bit wrong now it
might be totally different. But if I recall the soccer
(29:46):
stadium was maybe seventy to eighty million dollars for the
soccer stadium. Maybe I'm a little high on that. But
the district around there, which is going to be restaurants
and hotels, et cetera, that was going to be over
a three hundred million dollar district. And you've got to
stop and think of the benefit to the city for that.
(30:06):
There's going to be a lot more sales tax that
are going to come out of that district. But they
wouldn't be building it downtown if it wasn't for the
incentives that we are giving them. And so, you know,
because they've got they got to get their return on
their investment. But I wanted them downtown. Same thing with
Mutual of Omaha. Mutual of Omaha could have been built
(30:28):
out in Western Omaha and built some sort of a
campus out there at much less costs than they are,
but a fortune five hundred company. I felt and my
team felt needed to be downtown Omaha to really enhance
our sky skyline now and in the future. So those
details should be readily available once they are final.
Speaker 3 (30:49):
I'm gonna be honest. I'm a soccer guy. We talked
about this earlier. I'm so excited for it. In my
mind too. There's not a single bad thing about that place. No,
I can't wait.
Speaker 1 (30:57):
It's going to be great. And you know they're working
with state on turnback text two, which used to be
only around a given awarded around arena or convention center.
But we're working with the state on that too. But
you got to think again, the return on that investment.
We want them down there. They've got a spot that
they want to build. Obviously, like I said, I've been
(31:19):
the way for about eight months. I believe that's approved
right now. But what an addition to downtown. And you know,
people love soccer. I'm a soccer mom. I was telling Peyton,
my son played from kindergarten through college. So I think
it's just going to be another great addition to downtown
and it's going to bring more people downtown. It's going
(31:41):
to bring more revenue that's coming in for all over
the city. I had so many people say, well, I
don't like soccer, I'm never gonna I'm never going to
go to a soccer game. Why do I care if
there's a soccer stadium downtown. But you got to understand
the revenue that comes in from these big developments. It's
good for all of Omaha. It's just bringing in more
sales tax and more revenue. Sales tax is the number
(32:03):
one source of revenue for the city of Omaha. It's
sales tax, followed by property tax, followed by restaurant tax.
And we're going to get into that one day too.
Speaker 3 (32:13):
Yes, a lot of people are are interested about that,
and we can get into that too.
Speaker 1 (32:16):
But thanks for your thanks for your message. That was
that we're talking about.
Speaker 3 (32:20):
Absolutely, We're going to go to one caller here. This
is Dan Dan, thank you for calling News Radio eleven
ten KFAB. You're on with Jean Stouthart.
Speaker 6 (32:30):
Yeah, I just got a question. I live right pretty
much drive by the hospital, pretty nice area, but you
go anywhere south from that the parking and the crash,
what's going on with that? I know, I thought at
one time there was a law of that or they're
trying to make them all where you can't park there.
I understand when you have thirty people lived in a
(32:51):
house were five, you got to park somewhere, but that
is getting awful. It's got to be eyes or for
the for the neighborhoods. It's just driving me crazy size
kind of wondering what.
Speaker 4 (33:05):
Right.
Speaker 1 (33:05):
Thanks for the call, and you know, I'm not I'm
not sure specifically the area you're talking about, but I
assume you're talking about the housing area south of the
VA Hospital and you know, and which which really is
part of the South Omaha, which it is considered South Omaha,
And you know, for quite a while now, the councilman
that represents that area has been pondering some sort of
(33:29):
city ordinance that prevents people from parking in their yards.
The problem is where else are they gonna park? And
you know, a lot of those streets in that area
are older streets, they're narrower streets, some don't have sidewalks,
some don't have curbs. So the challenge for the city
(33:49):
council and the mayor is if there is going to
be an ordinance to prevent parking in yards, then again
we've got to look at how it is going to
be managed, in how it is going to be enforced.
I mean, if you see somebody parking in the yard,
is the next step to call the Omaha Police Department
to come out. What kind of punishment goes along with that?
(34:11):
Some housing there is no place to park but on
the street, and that's why they end up parking in
the yards. And I know it doesn't The whole issue
is it looks bad if you're in a neighborhood and
you've got a pickup truck or a car or whatever
parked in somebody's front yard.
Speaker 3 (34:26):
Well, one thing we talked about a few months ago,
this was in the news as well. But who's to
stop me from just parking in my front yard?
Speaker 5 (34:34):
Right?
Speaker 3 (34:34):
Who's to stop me? It's my yard right right?
Speaker 1 (34:37):
Well right now? It could be stopped if you live
in an area where there's an HOA, a homeowner's association.
Homeowners association always have by laws that the incovenants that
apply to that area you're living.
Speaker 3 (34:51):
And where I live, I.
Speaker 1 (34:53):
Always say I live about one hundred and twenty. I think, Hugh,
that's where I live. We have an HOA, and they
not only say you can't park in your yard. But
they're saying you can't have an RV in your driveway,
and you can't paint your house bright purple, and you
have to have a certain kind of roof.
Speaker 3 (35:06):
Do they tell you what to eat for dinner too.
Speaker 1 (35:08):
Well, no, they don't go that far, but they do
have covenants. I mean, I put up a fence in
my backyard a few years ago, and I had to
get permission to put up the fence from the homeowners' association.
So if you live in an area with a homeowners
association or a neighborhood association, they are the ones that
sometimes can prohibit that parking. But like I said, in
(35:30):
South Omaha, some of these older neighborhoods, it is to
be a real challenge because there sometimes there is no
place to park. So I understand your concern. It is
something that the city council is considering.
Speaker 3 (35:42):
Thank you for the call, Dan, We appreciate it. There's
one thing that we mentioned that you mentioned to me,
excuse me, that you wanted to talk about, So we're
gonna go to break here, we're gonna come back and
talk about that. And there's also a few callers that
have reached out about the restaurant tax Oh, I love it.
That up next, I love talking about it. You are
host of the show, g Stouther. I'm your producer Peyton Hilock,
(36:03):
and I got a good one for you here, Gene. Okay,
I'm ready this one. In Sunday's Omaha World, Harold, there's
an article on Mark Martinez not being able to run
for Douglas County Sheriff. The last paragraph of the article
stated that former Mayor Jean Stouth, according to Mark Martinez,
his campaign endorses Mark since the court has ruled that
(36:25):
Mark can run for Douglas County Sheriff. Who are you, Gene,
endorsing and why?
Speaker 1 (36:31):
Well, Number one, I'm not endorsing anyone at this point.
But that article, and I was gonna call the World, Harold,
I could tell you, I'm going to paraphrase exactly what
it said, and it was misleading, and it was and
a lot of people asked me about it and were
misled by it. So, first of all, I have not
and will not endorse Mark Martinez. Okay, So that is out.
(36:54):
What the article said is it said that Tom Warren
has endorsed Mark Martinez. So the way it said it.
It said Tom Warren, former chief or. It said Tom Warren,
chief of staff for Mayor John Ewing, and former Mayor
Jean Stothard has also endorsed Mark Martinez. What it meant
(37:17):
was Tom Warren was my chief of staff and John
Ewing's chief of staff, and Tom Warren endorsed Mark Martinez.
But the way it was written, my name was last
and right after it said and Jean Stothard also endorsed
Mark Martinez. So that was not that is not true,
and it was it was worded poorly by the World Harold,
(37:39):
but a lot of people misread it. And I was
going to make an attempt to ask the World Harold
to rephrase it. But I have asked the World Harold
many times to rephrase things and they don't do it.
So I just want to make that really clear. I
have not endorsed him. When I read it at first,
I had to read it twice. But the paragraph starts
out with Tom Warren. Tom Warren was the subject of
(38:00):
that paragraph. He's the one that endorsed Mark Martinez. I
when I heard about it at first, I immediately went
to mart Martinez's campaign Facebook and they had all his endorsements,
and they had Mary John Ewing, they had Tom Warren.
They did not have me on there. So you know,
you can look at what his endorsement page is. I'm
not on there, but no I did not, and I'm
(38:20):
so glad somebody called in and asked about it, because
that was misleading the way the World Herald wrote it.
Speaker 3 (38:26):
Yes, I agree, and again thank you for emailing out
and reaching out to us. This one now is restaurant tax.
We're switching lanes here.
Speaker 1 (38:33):
Oh do we have like three hours?
Speaker 3 (38:36):
I know, right, I mean I look down at the
clock and it's over our right.
Speaker 1 (38:39):
We can bring this back tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (38:40):
But go ahead, we can.
Speaker 3 (38:41):
Bring it back tomorrow.
Speaker 2 (38:42):
But here I go.
Speaker 3 (38:42):
I know this is an old issue, but I have
this comment. We were very disappointed that this was supposed
to be a temporary tax. But then of course it
was never removed.
Speaker 1 (38:51):
It was never a temporary tax, and that is a
rumor out there, and that is not true. You could
go on the City of Omaha web page. You could
look and read every ordinance that the City of Omaha
has ever passed. The restaurant tax was passed in twenty ten.
It was never supposed to be temporary. Nothing in that
(39:11):
ordinance says anything about it being temporary. And also the
restaurant tax is two and a half percent. That is
the third largest amount of revenue the city gets. When
I was running for mayor the first time, I said
I wanted to get rid of our lower the subtle
tax increases. Subtle raised both property tax and impose the
(39:35):
restaurant tax. When I got in office, the restaurant tax
was bringing in so much revenue the first year, twice
as much was originally estimated it would bring in. Do
you know how much the restaurant tax is bringing in now,
almost fifty million a year. Can you imagine if we.
Speaker 3 (39:50):
Took get some of that.
Speaker 1 (39:51):
Yeah, at fifty million out of the general fund, that
is a huge chunk. It would be financially irresponsible to
get rid of it now. But it was never supposed
to be temporary. It is a occupation tax also, and
all occupation taxes by law going to the general fund.
It's dumped into the general fund, just like sales tax
(40:12):
and property taxes are, and that general fund goes to
fund every city department. It was also never meant just
to go into the fire and police pension and This
is what we could talk about a lot. And I
want Jim Rose on my show sometime because he always
brings that up. It was always supposed to go into
fire and police pension, and we could talk at linked
about that at another show.
Speaker 3 (40:34):
I know, there's always so much to talk about, and
you look down at the clock and the show's over.
Speaker 1 (40:38):
Time flies.
Speaker 3 (40:39):
When you're having fun, the show's over. But we had
some good callers today, good emails. I just like hearing
about the city.
Speaker 1 (40:45):
And I do too, And you know what, we welcome everybody.
Please keep on listening and I'll take all your call,
like I said, or your email. Anything goes. I'm happy
to talk about what your issues are, your concerns, your
issues are, just to make a statement. Please keep on
call and we I love being here. This is great.
Popular Podcasts
Hey Jonas!
Hey Jonas! The official Jonas Brothers podcast. Hosted by Kevin, Joe, and Nick Jonas. It’s the Jonas Brothers you know... musicians, actors, and well, yes, brothers. Now, they’re sharing another side of themselves in the playful, intimate, and irreverent way only they can. Spend time with the Jonas Brothers here and stay a little bit longer for deep conversations like never before.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com