Today I read two stories about the same subject — an insurance company’s proposal to build a new office building near Crown Center — but they were so different it was almost like they were about different projects.
One story was by KC Star development reporter Kevin Hardy; the other was by CityScene KC website proprietor Kevin Collison, who was The Star’s development reporter years ago.
Now, up front, I’ve got to say that Collison is a friend and a former colleague. I don’t know Hardy and have never met him.
That said, Collison’s story from Dec. 2 about Fidelity Security Life’s proposed $84 million building at 27th and Grand was far and away more objective and factual than today’s story by Hardy, in which he reported that the City Council had approved the plan on an 11-1 vote. (Collison usually publishes weekly, so he didn’t have a story on today’s development.)
About the only similarity in the two stories was the gist of it: The building would house 300 employees of Fidelity Life, which currently is headquartered at 3130 Broadway, and Fidelity Life would get more than $7.5 million in tax breaks, including a 15-year-property tax reduction (10 years at 70 percent off, five years at 30 percent off) and a sales tax exemption on construction materials.
From there, the stories were entirely different. Hardy’s story was a screed against tax-incentive projects, aimed at agitating reader sentiments against any and all such projects. Collison’s story, on the other hand, did what a news story should do — lay out all the facts, quote people on both sides of the issue and let the readers come to their own conclusions.
Now, the fact that the vote was 11-1 (Ryana Parks-Shaw voted “no” and Brandon Ellington was absent) should indicate one of two things: Eleven City Council members are on the take, or the project has significant merit…There is no hint of the former, and Collison’s story cites plenty of the latter.
Despite the overwhelming council vote, Hardy, who has been at The Star the last two and a half years and was at The Des Moines Register before that, did not have one person speaking favorably about the project. He did quote one council member who voted “yes,” Eric Bunch, but it was regarding Bunch’s concerns about the way the council handles tax-incentive projects.
In all, Hardy quoted four opponents of the project. One was Parks-Shaw. One was from the Kansas City Public Library. One was from Kansas City Public Schools. The fourth was a professor of government at the University of Texas-Austin who researches government incentives and has studied the tax-incentive border war between Kansas and Missouri.
Now, here are some of the facts that Collison reported and Hardy didn’t bother with:
- The developers estimate the project will generate $9.2 million for the city and the other taxing districts, including the library and the school district, over the 15-year life of the incentive package. Without the project, the vacant lot would generate $946,000 over the first 15 years.
- The building would have 11 stories, five six levels of offices above a five-level parking garage.
- Crown Center owns the site and is selling it for $6.9 million
- The developer is Van Trust Real Estate, which has completed many significant projects in Kansas City, including the Polsinelli building on the western edge of the Plaza.
- The financing package consists of $20.8 million in owner equity and $62.5 million in loans.
- The architect for the curving building will be Pei Cobb Freed & Partners, which Collison described as “a renowned national firm.” (One of the firm’s founders designed the 2600 Grand building and the Federal Reserve Bank building.) Local design firms BNIM and HOK would also be involved.
- Construction is expected to start in the fall of 2022 and be completed in about two years.
**
Is this a good project? Is it too much of a giveaway? I don’t know. What I do know is that Kevin Collison, representing the “old guard” of development reporting in KC, gave his readers a lot of reasons to consider it favorably. Kevin Hardy, on the other hand, just slashed away in what was supposed to be a “straight” report.
**
If you have a subscription to CityScene you can read Collison’s story here. If you have a subscription to The Star, you can read Hardy’s story here.
JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC 
I agree the Star report seemed one-sided.
If you look at the difference between the kind of reporting you get from Jonathan Shorman and Mike Hendricks and the new bevy of bubble gummers Fannin’s hired, there’s no comparison. The errors of both omission and commission are egregious. Worse, there’s no institutional memory.
For instance, what’s the developer’s record for the accuracy of their estimated values and also for paying property taxes? Do they claim one value when selling the project and then claim dark store theory as soon as it’s built to cut the value in half or below?
Collison probably gave this developer more credibility owing to their track record with other projects and the reputation of the architects. Apparently the bubble gummer knew none of this, or, worse, did and failed to disclose it.
Hardy isn’t exactly a bubble gummer, but he’s surely getting paid significantly less — even more than a decade later — than Collison was. (Asking either of them to track down the developer’s record on estimated revenue projections would be difficult and time consuming. I’m not expecting anyone who’s juggling a lot of stories to do that on deadline.)
Jim, this is an interesting topic to weight in on. First, KCUR online also did a story on the council’s vote, and it has details in there that differ from other stories on the deal; KCUR, for instance, says the office portion will have 8 stories, not 5 or 6. Second, part of the reason this deal is so controversial is that its main tenant would be moving just 1 mile into this building — raising the question of incentivizing not just cross-state corporate relocations (as with Waddell & Reed) but relocations even within greater downtown (31st to the river). But all the stories I’ve read failed to answer an important question — if there was so much opposition to this deal, then how and why did 11 council members vote for it?
Maybe we’ll have to wait until it goes up to see how many floors of parking garage and offices there are…
Now, Jeff, you were an urban reporter for many years, and you know why this passed with overwhelming approval…But I guess you wanted me to say the answer out loud…
First, did you note that Crown Center owns the land? CC is not the driving force at City Hall it used to be, but it still carries a big stick.
Second, the architects, development attorneys, labor unions and others involved in building and construction take good care of the council members, particularly the members of the Planning and Zoning Committee. The development/labor crowd pours tens of thousands of dollars into council members’ campaign committees every election cycle. David Frantze, the attorney on this project, is a regular four-figure contributor to numerous council members.
Third, mainly because of No. 2, city councils past, present and future tend to be pro-development. Just look at a couple of current members…Andrea Bough, my 6th District representative (and I support her), is a development attorney. Katheryn Shields — a friend of mine and an excellent elected official, in my opinion — has two years remaining on her second eight-year stint on the council, plus eight years as county executive. She has nothing to lose and probably won’t run for political office again. She’s going to help those who have helped her.
Fourth, this looks like a good project. Twenty-seventh and Main-Grand is a much better location than 3130 Broadway, especially with the streetcar extension coming soon.
P.S. Since I retired, I’ve been contributing significantly to various candidates and elected officials, including Katheryn and Andrea. If there are things you want from the city, campaign contributions tend to give projects a nice boost.
I know and have worked with both Kevins. I think your criticism of Kevin Hardy is unfair. He a tenacious reporter. I don’t know all the ins and outs of this project, but Hardy is rightfully skeptical of tax incentive projects like this one for cross-town moves. He has written more than one story on this project. You neglected to note what he did report in his latest story what others might not have reported: Hallmark has previously spoken out against tax incentives for crosstown moves. But not on a project that would benefit them. Seems relevant.
He knows it was slanted. He’ll learn.