Lansing council continues Riverbend Heights RHID hearing after hours of public comment on tax abatement and school impacts

The Lansing City Council opened a public hearing on a proposed 20-year Reinvestment Housing Incentive District (RHID) requested by Astra Development LLC for the Riverbend Heights subdivision, then voted unanimously to continue the hearing to the January council meeting.

The RHID would direct a portion of future property tax increment to reimburse infrastructure costs for construction of Riverbend Heights, a proposed small-lot single-family subdivision of roughly 412–417 lots annexed into the city. Councilmember Clemens called for the public hearing to be opened; the council later approved a motion to continue the hearing to the January meeting by roll call vote.

Why it matters: Residents and other speakers pressed elected officials on how much tax revenue would be diverted under the RHID, what the city and other taxing entities would receive under the revised 80/20 split, and how new housing would affect enrollment and facilities in Unified School District 469 (USD 469). The council also discussed a related charter ordinance that would let Lansing opt out of KSA 12-52-50 and set RHID terms locally.

Public speakers — mostly nearby residents — raised concerns about lost tax revenue and school impacts. Tom Dials, a resident of Knollwood Drive, criticized the abatement scale, saying the original proposal was a 100% abatement over 20 years and that a later modification changed that to an 80/20 split. Dials asked, “what is the value in surrendering some 20,000,000 in tax revenue?” and said the three nearby proposed projects combined could yield “just short of 2,500 housing units.”

Other commenters echoed concerns about schools and public services. Kirsten Workman, a resident who said she lives near the Lansing Sonic, warned the council that “out of district students can't simply be bumped to make room” and cited district policy and state statute that allow students who gain district acceptance to continue enrollment. Betty Clingdenson, who described herself as a “numbers person,” challenged developer enrollment estimates, contrasting a number cited in meetings of 0.5 students per household with a U.S. average she said is about 1.94 children per household.

Several speakers questioned the distribution of information and community outreach. Daniel Page and others said many residents were unaware of the zoning and ordinance changes that allow smaller lots, and Janie Stockman and other nearby property owners asked for more time and public forums so neighbors could study potential impacts.

City staff and bond counsel addressed procedural and financial questions. City Administrator Tim said the developer generally fronts the infrastructure costs and is repaid over many years from property taxes; staff emphasized that if houses or lots do not sell the developer bears the financial risk. Staff also noted the city has approved rezonings for other projects but that actual house starts in Lansing have been minimal in recent years.

The council closed the hearing for tonight and voted to continue the public hearing to the January city council meeting. The roll-call vote to continue the hearing was recorded as: Councilmember Clemens — yes; Councilmember Gardner — yes; Councilmember Kirby — yes; Councilmember Kovaloski — yes; Councilmember Garvey — yes; Councilmember Robinson — yes; Mayor McNeil — yes.

The hearing will reopen in January; no final RHID resolution or tax-capture terms were approved tonight.