RECRUITING THE PLAYERS
by judy z. ellett
Nate Accardo, Custom Color/Accardo
Design District
Katheryn Shields, Jackson County Executive
Judge Dean Whipple, Western MO Federal Judge
Jonathan Kemper, Commerce Bank
Patrick McLarney, Shook Hardy & Bacon
Rafael Garcia, Rafael Architects
Mark Huffer, KCATA
Jerry Riffel, Lathrop & Gage
Bob Mayer, GMAC Commercial Mortgage
Mayor Kay Barnes, City of Kansas City, Missouri
Warren Erdman, Kansas City Southern
Kent Crippin, Downtown Council
Tom Trabon, Master Realty Properties
Michelle Sweeney, Ingram's Magazine
Kyle Gradinger, Ingram's Magazine
Michael McLarney, Downtown Council
Brad Nicholson, Nicholson Real Estate
George Birt, BBL Real Estate
Jon Copaken, Copaken White & Blitt
Dana Gibson, Gibson & Company
David Warm, MidAmerica Regional Council
Judy Ellett, Ingram's Magazine
Douglas Tatum, Folly Theater
Steve Dunn, J.E. Dunn Construction Company
Joe Sweeney, Ingram's Magazine
Dick Ahsmuhs, UMB Asset Management Group
Buzz Willard, Tower Properties
J. Grant Burcham, Missouri Bank & Trust
Unlike the old joke that asks how many people
work for the government, there’s no trick answer to the question,
“How many people work in downtown Kansas City?”
But there is some uncertainty to exactly where downtown is. By the Downtown
Council’s calculation, 90,000 to 94,000 people are employed in the
area that stretches from the Missouri River to 31st Street and from State
Line Road to the Bruce R. Watkins Expressway.
Not everyone, however, defines downtown Kansas City the way the Downtown
Council does, and some seem fully unconcerned about its geography. This
we at Ingram’s discovered when we hosted the Defining Downtown forum
at the Charles E. Whittaker Federal Courthouse on the afternoon of Sept.
7.
Approximately 30 developers, businesspeople, politicians and advocates
met to discuss where downtown Kansas City stands today and where it’s
going.
Kent Crippin, consultant to the Downtown Council and panel chairman, started the meeting off by recalling developer Paul Copaken’s vision of seeing 40,000 people pouring onto the streets of downtown at lunchtime.
Given the work force of 90,000, Crippin asked, “Why can’t we have 40,000 people on the streets at lunchtime?” He also reminisced about the mid- and late-1980s when one could see J.E. Dunn Construction and other cranes just about everywhere.
But Crippin thought the absence of cranes deceptive. He argued that despite appearances, the city is experiencing tremendous renovation activity.
“You can’t look at the cranes,” Crippin commented. “You have to walk the streets and look at the chutes coming out of those older buildings into the dumpsters.”
Pat McLarney, managing partner of Shook Hardy & Bacon, was the first to address the question, “What is downtown?” He addressed it not with an answer but a suggestion, namely that coming up with a concrete definition of downtown is less important than examining its problems.
favorably with other cities, is in the old downtown area, in the Loop,” McLarney noted.
For this reason, McLarney acknowledged that his law firm has made the decision to move to Crown Center after doing business in Kansas City’s Loop for 118 years. The move of 1,300 employees, an admitted blow to the city’s core, will take place when Shook Hardy’s new building is completed at 26th Street and Grand Boulevard.
Although he argued against the move, McLarney could not persuade those partners who were tired of the environment in which they worked. They found the walk from One Kansas City Place to government buildings on the East Side of downtown, past the abandoned Jones Store and the derelict Law Building, too dirty and depressing. Apparently, too, law-firm visitors staying at the Downtown Marriott were displeased with the environment.
McLarney, however, does not believe the Loop’s problems are insurmountable. “I’ve got the solution, by the way,” he joked at 3:15, “so we’ll be out of here by 3:30.”
McLarney’s solution revolves around his belief in the
Downtown Corridor Redevelopment Strategy presented last May
to the Civic Council of Greater Kansas City.
Prepared by Sasaki Associates, Economics Research Associates and Frewen Architects, the report has
become known to those familiar with it as the “Sasaki Plan.”
The planning strategies that the
report incorporates include
concentrating destinations “to
create a sense of place and magnify benefits,” distributing public
subsidies and incentives “on the basis of a set of clear criteria,” adding amenities and open spaces to increase real estate values,
diversifying downtown to “create a place for culture, the arts, and living, not just business,” and maintaining a strong framework with the flexibility to accommodate new opportunities.
Although Mayor Kay Barnes claimed that she refers to the Sasaki Plan almost every day, her concept of downtown varies from Sasaki’s. In fact, she believes Kansas City has three downtowns, and they figure into her
River-Crown-Plaza approach to maximizing the assets of
Kansas City’s central business
district. Such an approach, she
believes, is necessary to package and promote Kansas City effectively.
“I certainly subscribe to this
program that the mayor’s put together about downtown being much larger than just the Loop,” said Nate Accardo. “That to me is taking a 30,000-foot view of what’s really going on.”
While these discussions were taking place, Rafael Garcia was drawing on a pad of paper. “I’m an architect, so you have to bear with my sketches,” he said, then stood to show the room his work. His drawings illustrated Crown Center, the River Market, 18th & Vine, Crossroads—what he called “the areas of influence” around the city’s core.
“If you look at any downtown that’s successful in the country, it’s not just the downtown,” Garcia argued, “it’s the perimeter area around it.” The issue
becomes how to connect all the areas of influence with each other and with the Loop.
For Jerry Riffel of Lathrop & Gage, the definition of downtown has to include Crown Center so that those south of the Loop will support downtown and fight for
it. He believes limiting the
definition of downtown to that area bounded by the freeways
creates competition among sectors of the same part of town.
“I think this is the most important,
long-term destructive tendency in economic development in Kansas City,”
Riffel said, “and I think we have to get over it.”
Buzz Willard of Tower Properties questioned why it was important to reach
a consensus on the definition of downtown when the problem rests with
the environment inside the Loop. Kansas City Southern Industries’
Warren Erdman concurred. Erdman
divided those who have an interest in downtown into retail, office, convention
and entertainment consumers.
“I would buy the larger definition of downtown, but it’s irrelevant,”
Erdman said. “The problem is
downtown in the Loop. That’s where consumers are choosing to leave.”
WALKING THE WALK
Steve Dunn observed that in 1994, after 50 years at 10th Street and Holmes
Road, J.E. Dunn Construction found itself facing the choice of whether
to leave the Loop or stay and expand. They stayed. Still, he cited instances
of blight in the city, such as the Law Building at 12th and Grand, calling
that particular building “a cancer.”
“People don’t want to walk by it, they don’t want to get
near it,” he said. “If you don’t deal with blight first,
you never will change the environment.”
His company made the decision to stay when plans for the Ilus Davis Park
and the Civic Mall were
announced. “We could see that there was a light at the end of the
tunnel, and believe me it wasn’t a train.”
Although all present were terribly concerned about the state of the nation in light of terrorist attacks and terrorist threats, they are less affected by these uncertainties than just about any other industry this side of defense. As Brian Stevenson commented, “Americans went inunprecedented numbers to the supermarkets” during the week after the attack on the World Trade Center.
But speaking in general about the state of agriculture, Stan Ahlerich of the Kansas Farm Bureau added a sobering bit of rural wit and wisdom, “My father always taught be to be optimistic—but don’t depend on it.”
One of the looming opportunities throughout the agricultural industry is what participants call “product agriculture.” Mark Drabenstott, of the Federal Reserve, describes it as being “much more focused on a calibrated, tailored product for the consumer” than traditional commodity agriculture has been.
As examples, Ron Arp of Fleishman Hillard cited bottled water and baby carrots in bags, the latter of which became a $1 billion industry in a decade because producers understood that consumers would willingly trade the added price for the convenience of pre-cleaned and cut carrots. The industry, he observed, “is increasingly becoming consumer driven.”
During football season, by the way, Ron admits only to coming from “north of Kansas.” One wag then asked the question whose answer most in the room seemed to know already—What does the “N” stand for on the football helmets of that dreaded team “north of Kansas”? The answer? Of course, “nowledge.”
Brian Stevenson noted that the bakery business is also looking for ways to expand its products for consumer tastes. The same holds true in the beef industry where Rob Ames observed that branding and marketing segmentation are becoming real even to small producers. In the dairy business, as Terry Mitchell, it is the “power of cheese,” the prototype of product agriculture, that may hold the future for the industry.
Peter Hoefherr of Missouri Dept. of Agriculture talked about the increasing “specificity” of agriculture in Missouri and the need for the state to be “proactive” in its development and marketing.
PASTURE TO PLATE
For those in attendance, the phrase “pasture to plate” is a
well known and understood neologism. The phenomenon suggests unified control
of the product from the producer to the store shelf. Mark Drabenstott
argued that this too is driven by consumers wanting “consistency
and quality.”
John Meyer agreed. “Unless you can control process all the way through,”
he noted, “it was very difficult to control the product.” Bob
Petersen observed wryly that he hears
frustration from producers who get only a chunk of the dollar but, he
added, “raw wheat is not very palatable.”
As Mike Sweat of Farmland suggested, much of the work his organization
has been doing is refining and streamlining the process. This is a process
that Farmland knows well being a self-described “farm-to-table cooperative
system.” “We’re doing hogs differently, beef differently,
why not grain?” Improvement in revenue, Sweat argued, will come largely
through improvements in the value chain. “I don’t think the
marketplace is going to give us a lot.”
This perceived need for control has resulted in what Dee Likes described
as a “huge growth in pasture-to-plate strategic alliances.”
Paul McKie argued that such alliances are the future of the livestock
industry. “The spirit of enterprise, partnerships, strategic alliances
is strong,” concurred Ames of the American Hereford Association.
Randall Linville’s Scoular Company has helped pioneer the middle
passage of this process, in that it trades, transports, handles and stores
grain products, but as Linville noted, “Producers are consolidating
as well.” This consolidation continues even though local lenders
are not always comfortable handling businesses of a certain magnitude.
“Synergy in Kansas City,” summed up Mark Drabenstott, “is
stronger than it ever has been.”
Given the pace of consolidation and the formation of strategic alliances among major players, the world of farming is becoming increasingly bifurcated.
Dee Likes sees “a culture war” brewing in the agriculture community: on the one side are the “progressive innovators;” on the other side are the “anti-corporate populists.” Some are adapting to change, Likes argued, and others are resisting. Peter Hoefherr described the division as being between those who ranch or farm for “quality of life” and those who do it as a “business.”
As Stan Ahlerich observed, “20 percent of us are producing 80 percent." In the dairy industry, Terry Mitchell added, 7 percent of the farms produce 50 percent of the product.
Mark Drabenstott noted that we have been “on a path for decades in which we’ve become more efficient.” The driver throughout these years has been technology. The problem is that those producers who do not embrace technological change have had to turn to non-farm income sources. (Curiously, e-commerce received no attention at the session. Yet, as Bob Petersen noted, just a few years ago there were three items on every agenda, “e-commerce, e-commerce, e-commerce.”)
Rob Ames expanded on the theme, noting that for all the consolidation there is still a lot of beef supply produced by people “more interested in lifestyle” than in their economics. And this is a lifestyle that dates back to the 1800s, one that people will not abandon easily.
Marc Johnson of Kansas State added that those who are able to change would have a bright future. Those interested in “yesteryear” will not. Ironically, government programs may benefit the larger, sophisticated producers more than those who are struggling. As Randall Linville observed, the producers that are thriving are those who understand farm programs and risk management tools.
For all the reality of the conflict, Likes sees it as a distraction from the real battle at hand. “To win the war for the center of the consumer’s plate,” he insisted, “we have to stop fighting in the foxhole.”
For all the virtues of consolidation, and they are many, the one thing that today’s “producers” are producing fewer of is children. “Human capital,” claimed Stan Ahlerich, “is not coming in the front door.” And agriculture remains a tough business to walk into from the outside.
“We’re not too many years away from shortage of leadership in this industry,” lamented Russ Weathers of the AFA, a man whose business is “human capital development.” He understands the problem is complicated. Young people want to live in rural America and work in the agricultural industry, but they don’t want to absorb the responsibilities that have burdened their parents.
Their “mentors,” Weathers added, are telling young people “to get out of the business.” Stan Ahlerich offered a slight correction: “They’re hearing from the market not to come back.”
Marc Johnson confirmed that fewer students are coming off the farm and ag colleges are filling with “urban folk.” Those who become producers are learning “resiliency.” This takes the form of risk management, marketing, value chains, and strategies to prepare student for the long term.
The FFA has also adapted to the changing ag environment, a change reflected in its new name, the National FFA Organization. As Jamie Lile noted, the organization is no longer just about “farming.” In fact, “farming” on its Web page.
Yet for all the changes, FFA has not turned its back on its heritage. Lile told the story a member who was asked by a someone why he wore his blue jacket on that particular hot day. “It’s a tradition,” he answered. “We’ve worn these jackets for 70 years.” Impressed, he responded, “It’s good to see someone so young believe in something so much.”
When Petersen asked for a show of hands, two-thirds acknowledged having once been blue jackets themselves.
Rod Brenneman spoke likely for all present when he noted that “barriers to entry in ag have become great.” Among the most frustrating for producers is regulation, particularly environmental, a barrier that seems to get higher all the time.
For people like Foley of the Dept. of Agriculture, environmental issues have become among the focal points of his mission. “I stay closely vested in these issues,” he stated, “and serve as a voice for agriculture.” Part of the problem, as Peter Hoefherr suggested, is that “our urban cousins don’t understand farming.”
Although several others skirted the regulatory problem, Stan Ahlerich of the Kansas Farm Bureau tackled it head on. “They are after agriculture,” he said bluntly; the “they” remained undefined but referred most likely to political figures and their environmental allies.
Ahlerich argued that if “they” continue down this path, there’s a potential to drive the ag industry offshore. Our dominance in ag is not something we can take for granted.
THE WEATHER
Yes, Virginia, it is entirely possible that a group of ag folks can chaw
for two hours and never talk about the weather. That’s just not the
type of forecasting agribusiness is about today.