KC schools call Plaza tax break plan ‘malpractice,’ say developers want too much
A new objection to the plan to revamp Kansas City’s flagging Country Club Plaza has nothing to do with the possibility — outrageous to some, welcomed by others — of 10- to 15-story buildings being approved to rise on the historic shopping district.
Opposition now regards money and school kids.
On Friday, one work day before the next meeting of Port KC — which is currently considering approving a $300 million tax exemption package for the Dallas company leading the shopping district’s revitalization — the Kansas City Public School District (KCPS) sent a letter to Port KC, the city manager, the mayor and members of the City Council arguing that such a package would place a heavy burden on schools.
“KCPS certainly appreciates that the Plaza is an important cultural and economic hub for our city — it is one of the largest contributors to our local funding,” Superintendent Jennifer Collier said in the emailed letter. “Without appropriate contributions to the school district over the life of the project, a tax exemption would be more than inappropriate; it would be malpractice.”
The letter, which The Star obtained, is the latest salvo to be launched against the Plaza project and Dallas-based Gillon Property Group, which in June 2024 purchased the 103-year-old Spanish-styled district for $175.6 million with the long-term promise to return it to previous glory and beyond. As renderings of possible plans were revealed in the media over the last 16 months, expectations for a renewed Plaza rose.
Then, in October, the Dallas group revealed parts of a master plan that included asking for building limits to be raised, effectively overriding the “Plaza bowl” overlay, so that where three- and four-story buildings currently exist, Gillon could have the option to erect buildings as tall as 150- to 200-feet, or about 10 to 15 stories.
In November, a new rendering revealed multiple apartment complexes rising 10 stories or more along the Plaza’s perimeter.
For the Plaza to survive and thrive, the company has argued, the area needs “greater density,” meaning more people living, working, shopping and eating in the district. But the prospect of tall apartment and commercial buildings has raised concerns among neighbors, historic preservationists and the Kansas City chapter of the American Institute of Architects which sent a letter to the Kansas City Council urging its representatives to “preserve the human scale of the Plaza for future generations.”
But the school district’s dismay regards proposed tax breaks for the developers, not the potential building heights.
The Star contacted the offices of Mayor Quinton Lucas, City Manager Mario Vasquez and Port KC CEO Jon Stephens for comments or statement.
On Friday afternoon, the mayor’s office said that immediately upon receipt of the superintendent’s letter, he convened a meeting with Collier and other school district representatives, Port KC officials and Plaza ownership to at which parties “agreed to robust exchange of information and continued dialogue” to benefit the city’s schools and the Plaza.
“Mayor Lucas expects resolution over the weeks ahead and a continuation of the strong century-old relationships between our schools, the Plaza, and the City,” the mayor’s office said.
Stephens, with Port KC, responded in the midst of travels, In a text, he struck and even tone, saying, earlier in the day, “Overall, I believe there has been confusion regarding the proposal. These are complex projects and substantial changes have been made to address many concerns. We remain hopeful that everyone will see that collaboration is occurring and there are great benefits to the schools we all support and believe in as well as the overall community.”
Following the mayor’s meeting, he texted again, “Since we spoke, we have had significant and meaningful conversations with KCPS and the developer. We remain very optimistic a win-win will be reached — one that preserves a major asset of our community for generations to come and continues to support the school district and the community.”
A $309 million tax break
Gillon’s plan over the next 15 years is to invest about $1.4 billion into the Plaza to support 1.7 million square feet of commercial and retail space, 751 new residential apartments in multiple buildings and two hotels, one with 138 rooms at the site of the former Cinemark Palace at the Plaza movie theater. Another with 140 rooms would be across the Plaza where the Theatre Building is located, northeast of Nichols Road and Central Street.
The figure does not include as much as $100 million in infrastructure work anticipated to be provided by the city, which would brings the total Plaza price tag to $1.5 billion.
To offset costs, Gillon is seeking public money in the form of both tax breaks and tax increment financing (TIF).
In November, the Economic Development Corporation of Kansas City’s TIF Commission forwarded a recommended to the City Council to approve a plan that would return about $110 million to the company, using economic activity taxes, which includes all non-property tax sources, over 23 years. That means that as the Plaza starts generating more tax revenue for the city through sales taxes, tourism taxes and earnings taxes for new employees working in the district, half of that money would get redirected back to the developers until the $110 million is reimbursed.
The Council is expected to take up the TIF proposal at a future meeting. Their next full meeting is Thursday, Dec. 18, at 2 p.m.
Gillon, meanwhile, also has a proposal before Port KC, which is set to meet Monday, in which the company is seeking a 100% property tax exemption, which means they would pay property taxes equal to what they pay now on the Plaza for the next 30 years, with increases of 2% every two years. This is instead of paying taxes on the true assessed value of the property as it increases.
According to tax projections, Gillon would be estimated to pay about $430 million in property taxes over the next 30 years without any exemptions. Should Port KC approve the proposed tax breaks, the company would instead pay about $121 million in that time, saving it approximately $309 million that would have otherwise gone to local jurisdictions including KCPS.
Port KC’s commissioners had been set to discuss, and possibly vote on, the proposal last month at their 3 p.m., Nov. 17 meeting. But shortly before the meeting was set to begin, discussion of the Plaza and any possible vote was taken off the agenda.
Gillon said it did so in order to seek more input from the school district, the Kansas City Public Library and other entities that would be affected by the plan.
On Friday afternoon, Port KC published its meeting agenda for its next meeting on Monday, which does not include discussion of the Plaza incentives.
‘Abandoning our children’?
The school district argues that that is too much of a break over too long a time, insisting that it would rob schools of much-needed money.
In fact, the letter maintains, “The district estimates what they have proposed to pay us every year for the next 30 years is less than what they paid us last year.”
Beyond public schools, property taxes support the full range of public services, such as police, fire, libraries, parks, roads, community colleges, health and sanitation departments, and many others.
“Simply put, we cannot pay our teachers more if our local revenues do not increase,” the letter said. “We cannot pay our bond back on the timelines promised to taxpayers if the Plaza is not participating.”
The reference to a bond speaks to the April 8 election in which Kansas City residents voted overwhelmingly, 85% to 15%, to approve a $474 general obligation bond to pay for critical infrastructure repairs and deferred maintenance, build new facilities and to provide $5 million to every school in the district to make improvements to such matters as safety, play areas and STEM, music and athletic facilities. The bond would also allocate $50 million to nine Kansas City area charter schools.
“Our taxpayers,” the letter said, “voted to pay more in taxes to support Kansas City’s kids, can’t the development community make the same commitment? If the Plaza is not contributing to the bond for 30 years, it means it never will, and the bond repayment becomes a greater burden for our residential taxpayers.
“KCPS needs confirmation that this project will not be abandoning our children, our teachers, our seniors, and our taxpayers. We still do not have it.”
The letter states that on Nov. 21, district personnel met with Port KC staff and the developers. The district made a request for specific financial information at the meeting. The district said it also suggested that Gillon receive a 70% exemption on further increases in the Plaza’s property tax, as opposed to 100%, to ensure “Kansas City kids have a share in this community investment.”
They said that following the Nov. 21 meeting, they have not been given the answers to their financial questions and have had little communication since.
“KCPS has not received any of that information, nor been brought back to the table to discuss an updated proposal with Port KC staff or the development team,” the letter said. “We have not been able to determine if the project is going forward for a vote at Monday’s Port KC meeting and have been told that Port KC remains in negotiations with the development team. KCPS has not been able to do any additional negotiating on our own.”
The County Club Plaza is not, and had not been, on the Port KC agenda for Monday, the agency’s spokeswoman, Meredith Hoenes, said Friday in a text message.
Had it been on the agenda, City Councilman Johnathan Duncan, whose 6th District includes the Plaza, indicated that he would have requested Port KC to have it removed.
“Councilwoman (Andrea) Bough and I were told by the developer’s attorney, just this week, and by the developer’s themselves, that they were going to have additional meetings with the taxing jurisdictions and with the school district in particular. And that hasn’t happened,” Duncan said.
Having read the superintendent’s letter on Friday, he said the superintendent had valid concerns.
“I think Dr. Collier’s point about ensuring that they’re able to pay back this bond is an important one,” he told The Star. “I think the taxpayers and voters of Kansas City showed overwhelmingly that they support our schools. And I think that is a clear message to council members, and the Port Authority and hopefully to the mayor, that this matters.”
He continued, “We have to be more vigilant in how we’re evaluating these projects. I want to see beautiful development happen in Kansas City. I want to see us remediate blight. I want us to ensure that the Plaza has another 100 years of vitality. I also want to ensure that while the developer’s attorneys are going to be fierce defenders for their clients, that we, as council members, are going to be fierce defenders to get the best deal for our residents.”
‘Little to no say from the community’
David Price, the president of the American Federation of Teachers Union Local 691, which represents the majority of some 3,500 Kansas City Public Schools employees, called the Plaza tax abatement “a huge concern.”
“A situation like this, when a project like the Plaza is asking for 30 years at 0% taxes, that really hurts us,” Price said. He also said he objects to what he considers to be a rushed and problematic process.
“You know, we’re always told at the end of the year about these big projects,” he said. “And now they’re trying to push to get them passed before the end of the year, with little to no say from the community, or the district.”
Rachel Hogan, a leader with Parents for KC Kids, a volunteer group that organized to push for passage of the April bond issue, said that when she sees the Plaza financial proposal, “it’s really hard to see it as anything but another giveaway to wealthy developers that’s coming at the direct cost of our kids having the schools they deserve.”
“It’s 100% abatement,” she said. “And that just feels completely unreasonable. That’s not only the entirety of my daughter’s education and all her classmates, but also all of their children’s. You look at other cities, and Kansas City is really far outside the norm on how much tax abatements are costing and how long they’re lasting.”
She, too, complained about the process in which significant financial decisions that affect not only the district, but almost all city services, are being made by Port KC’s non-elected body.
“I think a key part of the frustration that a lot of parents are feeling is with Port KC,” Hogan said. “It’s been almost impossible to find out information about these projects before they’re already passed. . . .It’s just infuriating to have like an unelected board give handouts to developers without accountability, without transparency, without public engagement.
“And I have yet to see anything that justifies that these developers even need this money. They’re planning to put in all these luxury apartments. There’s no affordable housing. And there are even questions about what this project really is going to look like . . .and why the developers need this money, and for it to be for so much, for so long, at the cost of people who rely on public services in our city.”
The Star’s Chris Higgins contributed reporting.
This story was originally published December 12, 2025 at 12:18 PM.
