Wichita Larksfield Place bonds should not be issued


Today’s meeting of the Wichita city council will have a public hearing concerning the issuance of health care facilities revenue bonds for Larksfield Place, a decidedly high-end retirement and assisted living center in east Wichita.

These bonds are similar to the Industrial Revenue Bonds that the city issues frequently. The primary economic benefit to recipients of IRBs is the property tax exemption that accompanies the bonds. In the case of the applicant Larksfield Place, the property tax exemption is of no value, since as a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, it doesn’t pay property taxes. The economic benefit to Larksfield is that the buyer of the bonds will not have to pay taxes on the interest it earns. This allows Larksfield to reduce its interest costs on the bonds.

Larksfield may also benefit from a sales tax exemption on materials purchased with bond proceeds. A Larksfield representative said that it will apply to the State of Kansas for the exemption, which it has received in the past. With the state budget situation, however, that exemption may not be granted, he said.

The important public policy question is why does Larksfield operate as a non-profit institution, and what impact does that have on Wichita. Generally we think of non-profits as having an educational or charitable mission, perhaps helping the elderly who can’t afford to live in an assisted living center. The Larksfield representative I spoke to was not able to give examples of things Larksfield does to merit non-profit and tax-exempt status. Instead, he referred me to the organization’s IRS form 990. That form asks for the organization’s primary exempt purpose. Larksfield’s response on that form is this: “To operate and maintain suitable resident facilities and services for the care, treatment, and rehabilitation of elderly persons including non-acute health care, in an integrated environment in which quality of life can be maintained at the lowest feasible cost.”

It’s a good thing that the statement didn’t mention the lowest possible cost, as Larksfield Place is definitely not a low-cost operation. It is probably the most luxurious retirement home and assisted living center in Wichita.

Good public policy requires that similar organizations are treated equally by government. It is difficult to distinguish the mission and business plan of Larksfield Place from assisted living centers in Wichita that don’t have non-profit status. The fact that Larksfield is able to operate outside the realm of the tax system gives it an advantage that isn’t justified by any rational pubic policy.

Further, the privileged tax status of Larksfield Place serves as a deterrent to others who may wish to compete in the same market. This is the reason why the Wichita city council should deny the application for health care revenue bonds. Businesses without tax-advantaged status have to pay higher overhead costs (in the form of higher property taxes) and are at a competitive disadvantage for hiring workers from within this community if they compete with Larksfield Place (or other firms with these tax breaks) in hiring workers and raising capital.

Although the Wichita City Council did not issue the 501(c)(3) tax exempt status to Larksfield Place (that was issued by the Internal Revenue Service), the council can help keep the playing field level by denying this application.


3 responses to “Wichita Larksfield Place bonds should not be issued”

  1. jackfrost118

    to check out similiar 501.(c) (3) organizations go to the website
    http://www.guidestar.org – Just found out about this site last week as I was attending the board meeting for a 501.(c) (3) i’m a member on. This is a great way to compare costs to similiar organizations to see if your middle of the road.

  2. fmc

    Here’s an interesting question: if Larksfield is a 501(c)(3), how was it able to accumulate $2 million to have on hand for this new building extension?
    I can assure you, from the numerous residents of Larksfield that I know, it is not OPERATED as a “non-profit” from THEIR point of view (one resident requiring full-time care is paying $48,ooo a MONTH). Someone in the press should look into this (hint, hint). In addition, their 501(c)(3) filings are always out of date, and non-informative.

  3. Anonymous

    I work at another non-profit retirement community in Wichita that is a competitor to Larksfield Place. This article and the comments are totally off base. First- Larksfield like 90% of non-profit communities in Kansas loses money each year from their operations. Their mission and programs are sustained through charitable contributions. Second- they do meet the definition of a non-profit as any money they do make or contributions received go back to fund programs and the quality of care recieved. If you compare staffing numbers at Larksfield and other non-profits- they are significantly higher than the for-profits. That is the main difference between the two. Non-profits don’t line the pockets of shareholders or owners, they reinvest their money into current or new programs and services.

    Go visit a few of the non-profits and for-profits and the difference is stark.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.