Should KCMO give Folger's plant assistance?

KCLofts · Post by **KCLofts** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 3:54 pm

Committee will consider help to keep Folger plant

A Kansas City Council committee will consider plans on Oct. 22 for public assistance to retain The Folger Coffee Co.'s plant Downtown.

The Planning, Zoning and Economic Development Committee's recommendation will go to the City Council on Oct. 23.

Al Figuly, executive director of the Planned Industrial Expansion Authority, said Monday that Folger could qualify for tax breaks on equipment purchases to update the plant at 701 Broadway if the City Council approves the authority's request for a redevelopment area.

The city could issue Chapter 100 bonds to buy equipment that would be leased to Folger. The company's lease payments would retire the bonds. Folger wouldn't pay sales and property taxes on the equipment while the city owns it.

Folger officials couldn't be reached for comment.

In August, a company official said the plant is seeking a new production contract from an undisclosed source that would add 50 to 85 jobs in Kansas City.

Folger's multistory building employs about 75 people and has been running around 15 percent of capacity since the company's owner, Cincinnati-based Procter & Gamble Co. (NYSE: PG), shifted most of its production to a larger Folger plant in New Orleans that employs about 600 people.

About 225 people previously worked for Folger in Kansas City.

Â© 2003 American City Business Journals Inc.

This building is prime real estate. It seems there are better uses for it than having a factory that runs at only 15% capacity. Obviously losing jobs would be a bad thing, but in another form, the building could provide much more than 75 jobs.

I must admit that I'm not a coffee drinker, but the smell of coffee in downtown is great.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 3:59 pm

that's what I was about to say...it's worth it to keep the coffee smell downtown

tat2kc · Post by **tat2kc** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 4:02 pm

I do have a problem with this. The plant reduced its workforce less than a year ago, if I am not mistaken. How much could the plant have deteriorated in that amount of time? I'd really have to question what the money would be used for. Is the plant in that bad of shape?

KC0KEK · Post by **KC0KEK** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 4:33 pm

I recall reading an article a few months ago that this plant was picked to produce coffee in a new type of container. Has that changed? Or is that the equipment that they'd be buying?

SonicBoi · Post by **SonicBoi** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:28 pm

I thought I heard that plant closed years ago.

Post by **dangerboy** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 9:47 pm

Seems kinda odd to reward a business for downsizing. This location is far from blighted, it would likely get a lot of interest for other uses if the plant closed. While it would be nice to retain jobs in the dwindling manufacturing sector, this company's history doesn't indicate a very strong commitment to Kansas City.

Some modest incentives would be appropriate, but we shouldn't go overboard on this one. Since it's just bonds for equipment, and not TIF, odds are it will be approved without much controversy.