Should Overland Park fund Black & Veatch’s big project? | Opinion

Overland Park officials are considering nearly $230 million in public subsidies for a real estate project led by Black & Veatch, a globally successful engineering firm with the means to finance its own development.

The proposal, dubbed Overland Park Plaza II, would convert Black & Veatch’s 78-acre campus into a $1.12 billion mixed-use development featuring a new headquarters, 1,900 residential units, a hotel, retail space, a public park, and nearly 6,000 parking spots.

The developer is requesting $227.7 million in tax increment financing or TIFs, $19.9 million from a special sales tax district, and exemptions on construction sales taxes. Together, these incentives would cover 22% of the total project cost.

To qualify for TIFs, the site is being designated a “conservation area” under Kansas law — a designation typically reserved for deteriorating properties. But this justification rests on an aging office building and some vacant land. Yet the site isn’t deteriorating — it’s simply being repositioned, a routine private sector strategy that rarely requires public assistance.

This deal mirrors others across the metropolitan area in recent decades: private companies seeking taxpayer help to upgrade or repurpose their own assets. Such subsidies often fall short of producing net economic gains. These initiatives often result in job and investment relocation rather than net economic growth, while diverting public resources from essential services like schools, infrastructure, and public safety. Even Overland Park Mayor Curt Skoog told Pete Mundo on KCMO Talk Radio that Black & Veatch has no plans to leave. The jobs aren’t in danger, they’re just being used as leverage.

And this time, the ask is bigger. Beyond relocating its headquarters, Black & Veatch now seeks to expand into residential, hospitality and commercial real estate — sectors already served by private, tax-contributing developers. By bankrolling this expansion, the city would be giving one company a taxpayer-funded edge over competitors.

Subsidizing Black & Veatch’s venture into residential and commercial real estate also risks distorting the local market. Dozens of private developers already operate in Overland Park without public assistance. By offering a taxpayer-funded boost to one firm — especially one with no prior experience in housing or hospitality — the city effectively tilts the playing field. Competing developers must bear the full cost of land, construction and financing, while Black & Veatch receives a multimillion-dollar cushion. This kind of preferential treatment can chill organic investment and suggests that political connections may carry more weight than business fundamentals.

I emailed questions to Bruce Anderson, Black & Veatch’s senior external communications director, about the proposal, but received no response.

If these components of the project can stand on their own financially, they shouldn’t need subsidies. If they can’t, they shouldn’t be built. Either way, it’s unclear why the public should absorb the risk. Johnson County’s real estate market is strong. Viable projects move forward without help.

Supporters might argue that the incentives are “pay-as-you-go” — that is, Black & Veatch gets reimbursed only if the project generates new tax revenue. But this still raises the fundamental question: Should public dollars support what is essentially a private investment in one of the region’s wealthiest cities?

This isn’t the first time the city has supported this property. Black & Veatch received industrial revenue bonds and tax abatements in 2009 and 2012, benefits extended through 2023. Now, they’re back for more, on a much larger scale.

A 2022 audit of other incentive programs by the Kansas Legislature flagged this exact problem: Economic development subsidies often fail to deliver promised outcomes. Their benefits are frequently overstated, while the trade-offs, such as underfunded schools and neglected infrastructure, are all too real.

Overland Park taxpayers may consider themselves more responsibly governed than Kansas City, yet this project suggests its leaders are repeating the same mistakes. Before signing off, city leaders should reflect on the role of city government. Is it to provide fair and equitable governance for all or to use taxpayer funds to underwrite a single firm’s foray into entirely new business ventures?

Residents deserve transparency, and developers need predictable, even-handed policy, not selective subsidies. Overland Park should aim for broad public benefit, not tailor public financing to a single firm’s business pivot. A fair marketplace requires clear rules, not special deals.

The first public hearing is scheduled for July 7 at 7:30 p.m. at Overland Park City Hall, 8500 Sante Fe Drive. Residents can attend in person or view a live stream of the meeting at opkansas.civicweb.net

This story was originally published July 6, 2025 at 5:05 AM.