By KEVIN COLLISON
A redevelopment plan that would use tax incentives to help build a $500 million nuclear weapons parts plant near Richard-Gebaur Memorial Airport is going to the Kansas City Council.
The Planned Industrial Expansion Authority, a state-chartered development agency, voted unanimously Friday to endorse the plan that would replace the existing weapons plant at the Bannister Federal Complex. The council is expected to consider the proposal in September.
The new 1.4-million-square-foot complex is slated for a 185-acre farm field at Missouri 150 and Botts Road. The project would be developed privately and leased back to the federal government for 20 years.
Under the private development scenario, the weapons facility, which is operated by Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies, would pay taxes for the first time, about $5.2 million in property taxes alone annually.
The current plant, which makes non-nuclear parts for nuclear weapons, is in a sprawling, federally-owned complex on Bannister Road in south Kansas City erected in World War II to manufacture aircraft engines.
The General Services Administration wants to pick a developer for the new facility Aug. 21. The land is owned by Hugh Zimmer, a Kansas City real estate magnate, and the estimated acquisition cost is $4.8 million.
Half of the new property taxes generated by the Honeywell complex would be used to finance an estimated $40 million in infrastructure costs, including two new interchanges on Missouri 150 and utility extensions. The biggest public beneficiary would be the Grandview School District, which would receive $1.6 million annually compared to the $652 the land now generates in taxes.
The proposal was supported at the PIEA meeting by business interests in south Kansas City, Grandview and Martin City. The proposed replacement plant would keep 2,100 well-paying jobs in the area with an average salary estimated at $95,000 a year.
“Maintaining 2,100 workers is a good use of tax dollars,” said Kim Curtis of the Grandview Chamber of Commerce.
It was opposed by several speakers who criticized using local tax incentives to help build a nuclear weapons plant when U.S. policy on the future of such armaments is uncertain. The Honeywell facility makes about 85 percent of the components used in a nuclear bomb, all of them non-nuclear parts.
“We know a new administration will come into office with a new assessment of weapons policy,” said Henry M. Stoever. “It would be folly for us to start a plant that may come to a halt.”
Ann Suellentrop of Peace Works and Physicians for Social Responsibility referred to a section of a development study commissioned by the PIEA that described the Honeywell plan as promoting, among other things, the health, safety and morals of the community.
“How is a nuclear weapons plant good for our morals and health?” she asked. “Is this not madness? It’s important we think of more than just money.”
Stoever said the landowner’s poor stewardship had allowed the open dumping and erosion that contributed to the property being designated as blighted. He and others said it would cost substantial amounts to clean up the existing Bannister complex should Honeywell leave the site.
Brad Scott, GSA regional administrator, said federal and state environmental agencies as well as the local congressional delegation would not allow the Bannister property to be left polluted.
“Absolutely, without qualification, we’ll clean up that site,” he said.
He added if Kansas City does not move forward with a plan to replace the Honeywell facility, the jobs and operation would likely be transferred to another nuclear weapons facility in New Mexico.
“This project will not affect the world of nuclear weapons,” Scott said. “The only certain thing that would happen is we’d lose 2,100 jobs.”