KC Council member seeking to halt airport bid received donations from spurned bidder
Kansas City Council member Teresa Loar, who has tried to derail the awarding of a lucrative airport contract to the leading bidder, previously received campaign donations from one of the scorned bidders.
Loar has raised multiple concerns about Canada’s Vantage Airport Group, which was the preferred vendor selected by a private city selection committee among five firms hoping to run food, beverage and retail at the city’s new $1.5 billion airport terminal.
Loar left a chaotic council committee meeting on Wednesday, walking out in dramatic fashion as other council members sought to move the lengthy debate to a vote. She and Katheryn Shields, who represents the fourth district, sought to slow down the process by leaving the meeting and threatening the committee’s quorum needed to vote. That tactic was ultimately unsuccessful as Mayor Quinton Lucas joined the meeting remotely to advance the contract to the full council.
In December 2014, ahead of her 2015 reelection to the council, Loar received a $500 donation from Paradies, which previously won a contract to run concessions at Kansas City International Airport. Likewise, local comedian and entrepreneur Elliott Threatt, who partnered with Paradies to run airport shops, donated $600 to Loar’s campaign in April 2015, according to campaign finance records maintained by the Missouri Ethics Commission.
Threatt and Paradies were involved in a joint bid to run concessions at the city’s new airport terminal, which is scheduled to open in March 2023. Based in Atlanta, Paradies Lagardère currently has a contract to run news and gift shops at KCI.
Loar said the contributions have no bearing on her decision and she said she does not favor any of the proposed contractors. She thinks the winning firm, Vantage, should not get the contract because it’s pitching a riskier operating model at KCI, she said.
“I could care less which of the four concessionaires take the airport. It doesn’t matter to me,” she said. “They’re all well known. They’re all very stable businesses. Any of those would work for me.”
BEHIND THE STORY
MOREWhat's the bigger picture?
Kansas City is currently weighing bids for a lucrative contract to run food, beverage and retail at the city’s new $1.5 billion airport terminal. A private city selection committee chose Canada’s Vantage Airport Group from five groups that submitted bids. If it wins, the company would oversee all concessionaire business at the airport for at least the next 15 years. But the city’s secretive selection process has come under scrutiny as members of the public and the council received limited information about the bids.
What's next
After the City Council selects a company, the winner will likely begin work soon inside the terminal to have construction completed by the March 2023 opening date of Kansas City International Airport’s new single terminal.
But the donations are primed to raise even more questions about Loar’s motivations in the controversial contracting process. Already, Lucas has publicly questioned her interest in the proceedings.
Without naming Loar, the mayor blamed her for much of the controversy over the bidding process Thursday morning on conservative talk radio host Pete Mundo’s show.
“I think it is entirely about the fact that unfortunately there is a council member who is particularly interested in one of the bidders — and certainly not the winning bidder — getting the final deal,” the mayor said. “I mean, there is no other explanation because it doesn’t make sense.”
On the radio, Lucas alluded to Loar storming out of Wednesday’s meeting and her subsequent interviews with local news stations in which she shared more doubts on the process.
On Twitter, Lucas, questioned how Loar could have so many specific questions about the bidders, but also claim there were not enough details made available to the council.
“How else could one cite chapter and verse the purported flaws, as well as their own voluminous opposition research file, in a procurement, but then claim a lack of information?” the mayor tweeted. “This has been a textbook case of why we have a procurement process removed from political influence.”
Citing other major challenges like violent crime, the mayor said the airport concession contract is not a large priority for most Kansas Citians. And he reaffirmed his confidence in the city staff selection process.
“Because one person is aggrieved, we’re going through all this dramatic process,” the mayor said on the radio. “We need to just vote, get the deal done and keep addressing the issues of Kansas City.”
Shriti Plimpton, owner of Fence Style Vineyards and Winery, said she has attended the last several council meetings on the contract and is confused by Loar’s opposition. She’s involved in the Vantage bid as part of its Grapes & Grains concept, a bar that would feature Missouri artisan wines and spirits.
“Each week seems to be a new set of objections that the Vantage Group successfully addresses but then there is a new set at the next meeting,” she said of Loar’s objections.
Plimpton said the airport deal presents an unparalleled opportunity for her woman-owned, minority-owned and family business in the Northland.
“The opportunity to educate visitors coming to the area about what we can grow and produce in the Kansas City area, and showcase our diversity and creativity is exciting,” she said. “I urge the city council to do what’s right and choose the Vantage Group proposal — it will make a huge difference for several small businesses like mine.”
But Loar said she is concerned about small, local businesses like Plimpton’s.
Vantage is pitching what the aviation industry refers to as the developer model. That means Vantage won’t operate any food and beverage outposts itself, but will build out the interior of the terminal and then sublease the space to other operators.
The developer model is less common across the country and is generally used in much larger airports. Loar said she worries that the multitude of small, local and minority businesses included in Vantage’s proposal won’t last long at the airport because of the high costs of building out storefronts and monthly rents.
In an interview, Loar cited testimony from Threatt about challenges he has had running concessions under the developer model in other airports.
Other bidders for the airport project have said their proposals included less risk for local businesses, who could license their brands without paying ongoing operational costs.
“There’s not going to be any profit for a number of years,” Loar said. “And these small businesses just can’t last that long. Some of them are barely making it now.”
Loar said it’s common for city contractors like Paradies to make campaign contributions to council members.
“I think you can probably find those companies on everybody’s reports to be truthful with you,” she said. “They’re a vendor of Kansas City so they’re going to contribute to any council member.”
Indeed, Threatt has made numerous donations to city leaders. Those include multiple donations to Lucas, Councilwoman Melissa Robinson, failed council candidate Geoffrey Jolley and former council members Alissia Canady and Scott Wagner.
But Paradies has donated less often.
Missouri Ethics Commission records show Paradies has made no contributions since 2017, when it gave $1,000 each to the KC Transportation Transit and Tourism Committee, a political action committee campaigning for a new airport terminal, and the political action group KC Leadership Fund.
Paradies previously contributed $250 to former councilman Scott Taylor in 2016 and in 2015 gave $250 to Kevin McManus, who represents the city’s sixth district. McManus could not be reached for comment.
The company previously made several donations to former Mayor Sly James. An online search of Missouri Ethics Commission reports shows McManus and Loar as the only current members of the council who have received donations from Paradies.
Paradies officials could not immediately be reached for comment. Threatt declined to comment.
State records also show Lucas received $1,000 from Milan Patel, of OHM Concession Group. That firm, which was previously pushed out of a much smaller airport after facing financial problems, has been identified as the principal food and beverage company in the Vantage proposal.
On Twitter Friday, the mayor said $1,000 is not a high-dollar amount in an expensive mayoral campaign.
“So, no, I don’t know this fellow,” he said of Patel. “Typically after you win, lots of people contribute. It’s actually people at the beginning you remember. I can remember donors from my first Council race, not someone who gave last week.”
Councilman Dan Fowler, the only council member on the city’s concession contract selection committee, previously faced questions about a potential conflict of interest.
Fowler previously hired local consultant Jason Parson to work on his election campaign. Parson is a partner in Vantage’s bid for the concessions contract, which the selection committee unanimously recommended.
Fowler sought an opinion from the Municipal Officials and Officers Ethics Commission, which commended him for raising the issue. The commission found “no direct conflict of interest” and “no direct evidence of favoritism,” but did note that the councilman raised the issue with the commission after taking part in the selection process.
“Although no direct facts were presented to question the lawfulness of your participation in the selection committee,” ethics commission chairman William Geary wrote to Fowler on Monday, “to avoid the appearance of impropriety to reasonable people of good will, your recusal from the selection committee would have been appropriate.”
The city’s conflict of interest policy says that public officials may not use their office “in a manner which he or she knows, or has reason to believe, may result in a personal or financial benefit.”
Fowler told The Star that he appreciates the input of the ethics commission. However, he said, he doesn’t think the commission understands that people constantly come to council members wanting help.
Fowler was part of a five-member selection committee made up of city staff and a Southwest airlines representative. He said he weighed in on the bids last, something he does on most selection panels to hear out subject matter experts first.
“I think one of my jobs on the council is to make objective decisions, regardless of who is proposing those matters to me,” he said, “and that’s what I did.”
On Loar’s donations from Paradies, Fowler said it’s an unavoidable issue among council members.
“We all have to go out and raise money and campaign,” Fowler said. “People that want to do business with the city, tend to give money to that. So I can’t make a comment; I did that, everybody does.”
Councilman Eric Bunch, of the fourth district, oversaw Wednesday’s chaotic meeting of the Transportation Infrastructure and Operations Committee.
He said he’s usually very cognizant of who is donating to his campaign, mostly because he has to ask for most contributions. He said he tries to separate campaign donations from policy decisions. For instance, Threatt recently contributed to his campaign, he said, though he voted to move forward with the Vantage contract.
While he’d like to see a wider overhaul of campaign finance rules, he acknowledged that developers and city contractors frequently contribute to elected leaders’ campaigns.
“We need to consider whether or not campaign contributions constitute a conflict of interest in our decisions. And I think that’s a question worth considering,” he said.
Still, Bunch said he was more concerned with Loar’s behavior this week, which he described as “completely unprofessional and inappropriate.” At Wednesday’s meeting, Loar invited bidders who weren’t recommended to speak out of turn, peppered the preferred vendor with questions and left the meeting in an attempt to sidetrack the process.
“She clearly favors a team,” Bunch said. “And that’s not an objective process — that she just wanted a specific team to win. That’s not how it works.”
On Thursday, Loar pushed back, accusing her colleagues of unprofessional behavior. She said they were making fun of her, yelled at her in committee and applauded as she stormed out of the chamber.
“It berates the council and it just makes us all look like clowns. And as a senior citizen and a female, I’m getting really weary of it,” she said. “We always talk about minorities getting offended. Maybe it’s an age thing, maybe it’s a gender thing, but I’m tired.”
The full council is expected to debate the contract next week. While others have been suspicious of Loar’s questions, she said the city must get the selection correct for the lucrative contract.
“This is a billion dollar contract over 15 years. We better not make a mistake,” Loar said. “I think it’s fine to trust the process but you better verify it too.”
The Star’s Cortlynn Stark contributed to this story.
This story was originally published October 1, 2021 at 5:00 AM.
