Missouri Shows that More Government Doesn’t Equal More Housing

Posted on by Patrick Tuohey

Housing is an important issue. Many people, myself included, believe it is a cornerstone issue for so much of what ails America. If we can solve housing, many other solutions would be within our grasp. Yet so many policy proposals seek only to address the secondary effects of housing rather than the core problem itself.

The fundamental issue here is supply and demand. There is a tight housing market in many places in the country where supply is already constrained—though that is generally not the case in Kansas City or St. Louis. Housing policies that focus on boosting demand rather than increasing supply tend to backfire. The Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 and the Clinton administration’s National Homeownership Strategy both drove temporary housing booms followed by market crashes. These policies didn’t solve affordability; they exacerbated it.

The same flawed logic has shaped housing markets in Kansas City and St. Louis, where misguided interventions have made housing less affordable. Kansas City’s adoption of the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) stifled new home construction by inflating costs. Builders, facing steep regulatory burdens, simply stopped building. In St. Louis, a reliance on tax credits and incentives for flashy developments has left vast swaths of the city with vacant lots and dilapidated buildings. In both cities, the results are clear: policies that ignore basic market principles fail to deliver desired results.

Kansas City and St. Louis offer cautionary tales. We don’t need more interventions that drive prices higher. We need policies that foster more housing construction, deregulate land use, and let the market work. Housing affordability won’t improve with more government spending—it will improve when we stop putting obstacles in the way.

Missouri Ballot Issues and the Return of Three Mile Island

Posted on by Elias Tsapelas

David Stokes, Elias Tsapelas, and Avery Frank join Zach Lawhorn to discuss: Missouri’s Amendment 6, the Kirkwood sales tax vote, the state’s minimum wage proposition, the return of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant, and more.

Listen on Apple Podcasts 

Listen on SoundCloud

Produced by Show-Me Opportunity

Federalism and The Founders’ Vision with Charles C. W. Cooke

Posted on by Susan Pendergrass

See Charles C.W. Cooke live on October 9 in St. Charles, MO
Tickets and Details Here

Susan Pendergrass speaks with Charles C. W. Cooke, senior editor at National Review, about the growing trend of federal centralization and its threat to the U.S. federalist system.

They discuss how the founders intended for states and local communities to have control over their governance, and why the push to consolidate power in Washington undermines American principles of liberty and self-governance. Charles explains why this centralization is antithetical to the country’s founding ideals, the consequences of this shift, and why it’s essential to reverse course.

Listen on Apple Podcasts 

Listen on SoundCloud

Produced by Show-Me Opportunity

It Has Been a Great Week for Economic Development Agencies in Missouri

Posted on by David Stokes

This has been a fun week for those of us who feel that economic development agencies in Missouri are the equivalent of Churchill’s famous description of Russia. Our local economic development agencies are a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.

North Side Grant Project Is a Disaster

The revelations about the North St. Louis Small Business & Non-Profit Grant Program being managed by the St. Louis Development Corporation (SLDC) keep coming. The entire grant program is rife with political favoritism, but at least the places connected to politicians actually exist! It turns out some of the other recipients of the grants are not, shall we say, real entities, like this “museum” just north of the Central West End:

The museum’s website advertises a facility, historical exhibits and a passion for illustrating the history of the Mississippi River and the people who have lived on its banks. But its address leads to a brick four-family structure in a neighborhood just north of the Central West End. No one answers the door, even during advertised business hours. And the building itself is surrounded by weeds and overgrowth.

“I’ve never heard anything about that place being a museum,” said Ray Sims, a longtime neighbor of the building. “How do I get the money?”

It’s almost like word got out that the SLDC was just giving away free money and, shockingly, people started making up reasons to get free money.

Recipients of Large Tax Subsidies Under Indictment

Does the SLDC make better decisions when dealing with big-time developers instead of ordinary people? Apparently not. Last week, the heads of a major St. Louis and Kansas City development firm were indicted in St. Louis for allegedly submitting false documents regarding minority-hiring rules. While this is the first indictment of these men (everyone is, of course, innocent until proven otherwise), their questionable business practices have been well known. Yet they have consistently received massive tax subsidies for work in St. Louis and Kansas City: particularly the latter in recent years.

Five Lux Living projects in Kansas City have been approved for incentives since 2021, including a $200 million apartment/hotel at 14th and Wyandotte streets.

Is it fair of me to blame the SLDC for an act  by private citizens or companies seeking subsidies? Perhaps not, but when politicians and bureaucrats choose who gets subsidies, don’t be surprised when unpleasant actors start circling. After all, political donations and tax subsidies have a strong connection:

For instance, around the country, politicians who make these deals are more likely to receive campaign donations, and they’re more likely to be re-elected. On the flip side, companies that make political donations to relevant officials are four times more likely to enjoy subsidy deals than those that don’t, and their deals are more than 60% bigger, to boot.

Again, it’s shocking, I know . . .

Maryland Heights Uses General Taxes to Make up for Failures

It isn’t just large cities that abuse economic development policy. Suburbs do it all the time, and they don’t always do it with misplaced tax subsidies. Sometimes, cities make the mistakes all on their own.

Several years ago, Maryland Heights decided to get into the ice arena business. Not a normal ice rink for its residents, mind you; that would have been understandable. City leaders apparently wanted to act like private developers and build a massive hockey and skating complex to make money for the city. This is, usually, a big mistake for cities.

It definitely was a big mistake for Maryland Heights. The city has announced that it has again been forced to tap into general tax revenues to fund the bond payments after its predicted ice complex revenues have continued to fall short. Part of the reason revenues fell short is that both Maryland Heights and the ice complex failed to collect a sales tax for several years that was implemented to pay for the bonds. I don’t know if that is funny, sad, or both.

Cities do not have to engage in economic development schemes to succeed. Unilateral disarmament is the best option all around. Until that happens, expect stories like these to be a regular occurrence.

Real-Time Crime Data with Jeff Asher

Posted on by Susan Pendergrass

Susan Pendergrass speaks with Jeff Asher, data analyst and co-founder of AH Datalytics, about the Real-Time Crime Index (RTCI).

They discuss how the RTCI provides a near real-time look at crime trends across the U.S. by sampling data from hundreds of law enforcement agencies. Jeff explains the challenges of working with incomplete and imprecise data, the methodology for standardizing crime statistics across different agencies, the importance of real-time data for informed decision-making, and more.

Listen on Apple Podcasts 

Listen on SoundCloud

Produced by Show-Me Opportunity

New School Options in the Heartland: Hybrid and Micro Schools

Posted on by James V. Shuls

School-choice policies open the door for a variety of schooling options to take root.

During the COVID-19 pandemic many families formed small learning communities. These “pandemic pods,” as they were often called, caught the nation’s attention and were the subject of numerous stories in the New York Times and elsewhere. Now, though the pandemic is over, many have realized the benefits of alternative learning environments. With the expansion of school choice programs throughout the United States, new schooling options seem to be sprouting up everywhere.

Recently, I had the pleasure to attend the Heartland Hybrid and Micro Schools Summit where we heard from entrepreneurs who have started new schooling options in Kansas. It was exciting to see the possibilities that are opening as parents, educators, and entrepreneurs create unique schooling options to meet the needs of students and their communities.

Hybrid schools are schools that meet on an alternative schedule, blending school and home education. A hybrid elementary school, for example, might meet in person twice a week. The other three days, they will have intentional learning activities or experiences for students to engage in at home with their families. Some have called this hybrid-homeschooling, and it operates similarly to many of the homeschooling co-ops families have used for decades.

Micro schools are what they sound like, small schools. Often, students are taught in multi-age or mixed-grade classrooms. Some micro schools are intentionally small, with maybe 10 to 50 students enrolled. Other micro schools are startups that may grow into full-size schools at some point in the future.

Entrepreneurs are starting these schools for a variety of reasons. Some are concerned about the values taught in the local public schools, others want different teaching practices, and some find themselves as school founders almost out of necessity. In many cases, teachers themselves are the ones starting the schools.

  • Josiah Enyart taught in the Shawnee Mission School District. He disagreed with school policies related to mask mandates during the pandemic and the district’s focus on critical race theory. After more than a decade in the classroom, he left and started Freedom Learning Academy.
  • Madeline Herrera too was a veteran public school teacher. She loved leading her students through engaging, project-based learning activities. After a frustrating experience where her public school stymied her efforts with her class to engage in meaningful changes at the school, she started Limestone Community School in Lawrence, Kansas. She has made project-based learning the cornerstone of the school.
  • When the Prairie Hills School Board voted to close the district school in Wetmore, KS, population 368, Analyssa Noe and other concerned community members jumped into action. They purchased the school building and started a new school, Legacy Learning Academy.

While this type of entrepreneurial activity is somewhat new in the heartland, it has been going on for a while in places with more generous school choice policies. In 2022, I contributed to a report, Leaving the Classroom but Starting a School, published by Step Up for Students, Florida’s major school choice organization. Our report highlighted the findings of focus groups conducted with 10 former public school teachers who founded private schools. The school founders in that report sounded a lot like the school founders I met at the Heartland summit. They were passionate educators who cared deeply about kids and had a vision for how schooling could be done better.

Hybrid and micro schools embody exactly what Show-Me Institute analysts have been writing about for nearly 20 years—when you empower educators and students with educational options, you unleash the creative and entrepreneurial spirit in education.

The Four-Day School Week Continues to Grow in Missouri

Posted on by Avery Frank

The four-day school week (4dsw) continues to expand rapidly in Missouri. The 4dsw grew from 34 districts in 2018–2019, or 6.5% of all Missouri districts, to 173 districts in 2023–2024, which is about 1 out of 3 districts. In just five years, almost 150 districts made the switch to a 4dsw.

Official numbers from the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) have not been yet released for the 2024–2025 school year. However, according to my own compilation, the 4dsw has continued to grow, as now 187 Missouri public school districts operate on a 4dsw schedule, out of 516 total districts.

My colleague James Shuls and I addressed a wide variety of concerns with the growing 4dsw on academic achievement, district finances, teacher retention, parental preferences, demographics, and learning time effects in a recent series of papers. These include a systematic literature review, a survey, and a descriptive analysis.

In brief summary, we found the 4dsw typically lowers academic achievement and instructional time, while also showing mixed and inconclusive effects on district finances and teacher retention. Overall, there is little evidence to suggest switching to a 4dsw has a lot of benefits, so districts should be cautious when considering the switch.

The Missouri Legislature took aim at the 4dsw in the recent Senate Bill (SB) 727 (SB 727). This law requires larger districts to acquire parental approval before switching to a 4dsw, and also creates an aid bonus for districts that have 169 days of school or more (which essentially means you must be a 5dsw to receive it). As the below figure shows, the prospect of these measures coming fully into effect in 2026-2027 did not seem to stop 4dsw growth going into the 2024–2025 school year.

four-day school week, Missouri schools, education, SB 727, public schools
In rural Missouri, the 4dsw is nearing the majority, as 47% of rural districts are now using the 4dsw. In 2024-2025, every new district which made the switch to a 4dsw was a rural district. Still no city districts have adopted the measure, and no other suburban district joined the Independence 30 School District in making the switch—although some have discussed it.

It will be interesting to see how the continued growth of the 4dsw affects our state. Is there a proximity effect—do districts near each other feel more pressured to switch? There is a dearth of information on the 4dsw. Shouldn’t Missouri districts proceed with caution when considering a switch?

The Many Doom Loops of St. Louis

Posted on by Patrick Tuohey

In April 2023, Show-Me Institute’s Susan Pendergrass conducted an interview with Daniel DiSalvo about big city pensions and the doom loop they face. A year later, The Wall Street Journal published a story specifically about the downtown real estate nightmare doom loop of St. Louis. And of course, as referenced in the photo above, we at the Institute have been chronicling the ever-doomed loop trolley on Delmar Boulevard.

Now there is one more “doom loop” article about the challenges facing St. Louis. Governing magazine wrote recently about how declining downtown activity leads to economic decline. Its observations are similar to those in the Journal. Cities like St. Louis, where vacant office spaces drive down property values, are experiencing a vicious cycle where diminished tax revenues lead to reduced public services, further pushing businesses and residents away. According to Jason Bram, an economist interviewed in the article, “It’s a very slow-moving, long-term trend that’s only gotten worse.”

This pattern of urban decline is related to the broader challenges facing cities that fail to address fundamental issues like public safety, infrastructure, and housing. St. Louis, already burdened by economic stagnation, could face further setbacks unless city leaders refocus on foundational public services.

Flashy developments like downtown stadia won’t cut it; St. Louis needs to avoid repeating those expensive mistakes. Instead, cities should prioritize core services. For St. Louis, that means investing in improving public safety, maintaining infrastructure, and focusing on policies that encourage growth.

Without addressing these fundamental issues, St. Louis risks being caught in a permanent cycle of decline. Other cities should also heed this warning and ensure that they focus on sustaining a healthy urban core before chasing grandiose development projects.

Kansas City Mayor Gets Basic Policing Numbers Wrong

Posted on by Patrick Tuohey

Kansas City Quinton Lucas recently tweeted out some charts regarding policing that need to be fact checked. While the Kansas City police are governed independently of city hall, the mayor not only oversees city funding of the police department, but every sitting mayor is automatically a member of the board that governs the police department.

The mayor is not a small player in Kansas City policing. As I argued in 2018, “No Missourian has more power over policing in Kansas City than the mayor,” so it’s a matter of concern when the mayor is promulgating incorrect numbers.

First, note that the blue columns in each chart seem to show police funding. The labels in the bottom show two years because the city’s fiscal year runs from May 1 to April 30 the following year. But the totals do not match police funding in the city’s annual reports. No explanation for the discrepancy was given.

Kansas City Councilmember (and former Show-Me Institute intern) Nathan Willett issued his own tweet regarding the mayor’s numbers, pointing out that a slightly different version of the slide failed to adjust for inflation. Were the numbers so adjusted, he pointed out, the chart would show Kansas City has yet to get back to pre-pandemic police funding levels.

One of the slides details crime numbers each year, such as homicides. Assuming that these depict calendar year crimes, as opposed to the fiscal year spending numbers on which they are superimposed, they still don’t match police crime stats.

The most embarrassing slide is the one examining priority call times. I wasn’t able to quickly find the numbers they refer to, but the times on the line chart are clearly wrong. The Priority 1 Response Times (in yellow) can’t be both 8:36 in ‘19/20 and in ‘20/21, because they are placed in different places on the line graph. And the 6:95 listed in the Priority 2 Response Times (in red) isn’t even a time.

I asked Mayor Lucas for the source of the information on the chart after the Public Safety Committee meeting on Tuesday night. He told me to file an open records request with his office. In Kansas City, that seems a polite way of saying “get lost.”

I don’t know the purpose these charts are meant to serve. But they don’t reflect a command of the facts on this issue.

Support Us

The work of the Show-Me Institute would not be possible without the generous support of people who are inspired by the vision of liberty and free enterprise. We hope you will join our efforts and become a Show-Me Institute sponsor.

Donate
Man on Horse Charging