KC’s $10 billion bond for Meta and Google data centers: a gamble for taxpayers | Opinion
Kansas City has long wagered public money on private ambition — but our latest bet is a whopper. With PortKC authorizing $10 billion in bonds for Meta and Google data centers, we’re not just courting tech titans — we’re doubling down on a high-stakes, low-transparency model of development that too often delivers more sizzle than substance. Behind the sleek renderings and grand promises is a familiar story of public risk, private reward and a bill that may land in taxpayers’ laps.
The decision to underwrite these data centers — primarily for tech giants Meta and Google — underscores a broader trend in municipal governance: the eagerness to chase marquee projects with public money, regardless of the underlying economics. According to a March 2025 article by Thomas Friestad in the Kansas City Business Journal, the incentives approved for Meta alone could reach a staggering $8.2 billion over 37 years. For perspective, that’s more than triple the city’s entire annual budget.
Supporters argue these projects bring jobs and tax revenue. But do they? Friestad’s reporting reveals that Meta’s $800 million Project Velvet, the first phase of its Northland campus, has yet to deliver meaningful revenue to local schools. Smithville School District officials report tax payments in the low thousands — not millions — as originally projected. Superintendent Mark Maus captured the frustration, noting: “There was a perception that this project was going to bring this windfall … and it may. We’re just not seeing that at this time.”
That should alarm every taxpayer. When the promised benefits don’t materialize, the public is left holding the bag. It’s not just the schools. Power demands from these data centers are immense — the sum of 100 Walmart stores each has been a base of comparison, Friestad wrote in his earlier report. To meet this, Evergy plans to spend $16.2 billion on infrastructure, including natural gas plants. While Meta and Google enjoy bespoke discounted electric rates, residential and business customers may see rising costs to subsidize the infrastructure needed to serve these digital behemoths.
Worse still, a new report from the 501(c)(3) nonprofit Good Jobs First, “Cloudy with a Loss of Spending Control,” shows that these subsidies rarely deliver a positive return on investment. The report details how states and cities across the country are being lured into risky, long-term financial commitments without clear benefits. Data centers demand vast infrastructure but generate few permanent positions — typically fewer than 100 per site — at a cost of nearly $2 million per job. That’s not a workforce development strategy; it’s a land-use boondoggle.
Greg LeRoy, the report’s author and executive director of Good Jobs First, said it best: “We have so many states willing to give up their firstborn in the name of chasing smokestacks or, in this case, server farms.” Kansas City may be Exhibit A.
Defenders of the PortKC bond decision argue that this will position our region as a tech hub. But at what cost? These deals are not just about subsidies. They include land use approvals, zoning changes, special utility rates and infrastructure upgrades — each with a price tag paid not by Meta or Google, but by the rest of us. And once locked in, these long-term deals limit flexibility for future development, potentially crowding out more sustainable or community-oriented projects.
This isn’t to say that tech investment is inherently bad. But if Kansas City wants to compete for high-tech development, it must do so wisely. That means demanding full transparency, rigorous cost-benefit analysis and clawback provisions when projections fall short. It means saying no when the math doesn’t add up and making sure the real beneficiaries of economic development are the residents of Kansas City — not just shareholders in Silicon Valley.
This can be done. Patmos, the company building an 8,000 square foot data center inside the former Kansas City Star printing press building in the Crossroads, did not ask the city for any incentives. Profitable businesses, especially large ones like Meta and Google, should be able to operate on the same level playing field.
Our city cannot afford to be dazzled by big names and bigger promises. We have learned too many times the results do not live up to the promises.
This story was originally published April 29, 2025 at 5:06 AM.