The GO Bond Doesn’t Risk Your Home-Just Your Wallet

State and Local Government |
By Patrick Tuohey | Read Time 2 minutes minutes

Citizens for Responsible Government (CFRG) have circulated emails claiming that if Kansas City defaults on the proposed GO Bond payments, creditors will seize the homes of Kansas Citians. That’s a scary prospect, and thankfully false.

CFRG points to Detroit as a model. According to the Detroit Free Press,  creditors left in the lurch by the city’s 2013 bankruptcy negotiated to take over city owned property to settle debts. General obligation bonds issued in Kansas City tax property to raise the money needed to repay the bond debt. But even in the worst-case scenario, no one is going to be driving up and down Ward Parkway picking out homes to seize.

GO Bonds are backed by the “full faith and credit” of the City. According to a statement from the City (emphasis added):

The security for the bonds is the City’s ability to tax real and personal property, not the property itself. Bondholders have no direct connection to property owners and do not have the right or authority to seize property in lieu of general obligation bond payments. 

In the extremely unlikely event the City did not make its debt payment from property taxes collected, the City could use other legally available funds of the City to make the payment.

The city may use a property tax to raise the funds, but even in the very unlikely event of a city default, creditors would sue to recoup their investment. A judge could then order the city to raise taxes. The City might also try to sell assets to generate the funds. Or, as in Detroit, the city would negotiate to settle the debt by giving creditors city property such as City Hall itself, assuming it isn’t being used as collateral for the convention hotel. Again, this is not the same as creditors taking privately owned property.

That the GO Bonds are necessary in the first place is the result of years of poor policy and financial management. And the bond plan is itself bad policy. Those two items are serious enough considerations without the fanciful notion that creditors will seize individual taxpayer assets.

About the Author

Patrick Tuohey is a senior fellow at the Show-Me Institute and co-founder and policy director of the Better Cities Project. Both organizations aim to deliver the best in public policy research from around the country to local leaders, communities and voters. He works to foster understanding of the consequences — often unintended — of policies regarding economic development, taxation, education, policing, and transportation. In 2021, Patrick served as a fellow of the Robert J. Dole Institute of Politics at the University of Kansas. He is currently a visiting fellow at the Yorktown Foundation for Public Policy in Virginia and also a regular opinion columnist for The Kansas City Star. Previously, Patrick served as the director of municipal policy at the Show-Me Institute. Patrick’s essays have been published widely in print and online including in newspapers around the country, The Hill, and Reason Magazine. His essays on economic development, education, and policing have been published in the three most recent editions of the Greater Kansas City Urban League’s “State of Black Kansas City.” Patrick’s work on the intersection of those topics spurred parents and activists to oppose economic development incentive projects where they are not needed and was a contributing factor in the KCPT documentary, “Our Divided City” about crime, urban blight, and public policy in Kansas City. Patrick received a bachelor’s degree from Boston College in 1993.

Similar Stories

Support Us

Headline to go here about the good with supporting us.

Donate
Man on Horse Charging