AdvanceKC 2.0 Community Survey Results

Survey Administration Overview

Survey Feedback Areas:
  • Accessibility of Jobs, Housing, Transportation, and Services/Amenities
  • Priority of Economic Development Goals
  • Types of projects to incentivize
  • Ranking of incentive priorities
Outreach method:
  • Office of Economic Development worked with DataKC to set up the survey
  • It was promoted via social media and AdvanceKC board members.
Timeframe: September – November 2021
  • Responses: 854
  • 15% of respondents report being involved with economic development incentives as part of their work

Demographics of Survey Participants

Feedback: Job Accessibility

Only four in 10 people believe they can find a job within a 15 minute commute; three in five agree they can find a job that covers their basic needs; and less than half agree they can find a job that affords them a house and car.

Feedback: Housing Accessibility

About an equal percentage of people agree they are satisfied with the condition of housing, empty lots, and structures in their neighborhood as disagree; and just over 13% are unsure.

Feedback: Transportation Accessibility

There is little consensus about the overall access to transportation in KCMO, but it is leaning toward more negative views. Under half of people agree there are enough roads/sidewalks to serve their neighborhood; over two in three people are not satisfied with their conditions.

Feedback: Services/ Amenities Accessibility

Nearly half of people disagree they have access to walkable retail/shopping; two in five agree they do; 12% are neutral.

Feedback: Priority of Economic Development Goals

46% of respondents rank housing or infrastructure as the most important project type to support through economic development efforts; six in ten believe tourism or population growth are the lowest priorities. These priorities are consistent across all demographics.

Feedback: Job Incentives

There is strong majority support of incentives for job-related projects. Nearly three in five people support these incentives, while only one in five don’t.

Feedback: Residential Development Incentives

Nearly three in four people agree with incentives for affordable housing projects, while a similar proportion disagree with incentives for luxury housing. There is strong consensus agreeing with incentives for affordable housing projects and disagreeing with incentives for luxury housing  projects.

Feedback: Business Incentives

Overall, there is a mixed opinion on incentives for different types of businesses. Small/medium business and startups received majority support while large businesses and corporate headquarters received strong majority disapproval.

Feedback: Infrastructure Incentives

There is strong agreement with incentives for maintenance of existing infrastructure and new infrastructure development. Additionally, there is moderate disagreement with incentives for structured parking facilities, with only 1 in 4 people agreeing.

Feedback: Commercial Development Incentives

There is moderate consensus disagreeingwith incentives for any type of commercial development projects. Incentives for manufacturing facilities were the most agreed upon, still with less than half of people in support.

Feedback: Redevelopment Incentives

There is strong majority support of incentives for redevelopment-related projects. Nearly four in five people agree with these incentives, while less than one in ten disagree.

Feedback: Most Broadly Supported Priorities for Incentives

There were 10 project types that at least half of people agreed with providing incentives.

Feedback: Most Broadly Opposed Priorities for Incentives

There were four project types that at least half of people disagreed with providing incentives.

Feedback: Top Priorities for Incentives

One in three people rank affordable housing as the type of project that should be the City’s top priority for incentives; 93% of respondents had at least one of these priorities in their top 3.

AdvanceKC 2.0 Policy Considerations

  • Some focus areas received either strong support (rated as top priorities) or broad support (had few respondents disagree) but a few priorities received both
    • Affordable housing, maintenance of existing infrastructure, addressing blight in neighborhoods, and job creation received widespread and strong support as top priorities
  • Overall sentiment is accepting toward incentives
    • Reminder: not a statistically valid survey
    • However, only 1% of respondents disagreed with incentives for all project types
    • 54% of respondents supported incentives for at least 10 project types

  • Results show a disconnect between cause-effect in respondents’ minds
    • For example, job access within 15-minutes is deemed inaccessible, yet facilities that create jobs are not supported to receive incentives
  • Individual’s greatest and least priorities are consistent across demographics
    • Middle priorities experience rearrangement based on geography, race, income, and age
  • Income, race, and council district are all significant variables to one’s scoring of job, housing, transportation, and services/amenities accessibility
    • These variables are not significant to an individual’s support of incentives
    • However, the strength of agreement/disagreement with incentives for specific project types is affected by these demographic variables