Board hears four options for Main Library project; foundation and tax credits could offset costs

The Kansas City, Kansas Board of Education on Sept. 23 accepted as an informational item a presentation on options for the downtown Main Library and heard public pleas for a bold design that signals a modern, public-facing building.

Laura Hunt, director of libraries, told the board the library system has "a total library capital fund and cash balance as of 07/01/2025 of almost $48,000,000," and that a remaining half-mill of library levy revenue would yield about $680,000 a year going forward. Hunt summarized a recent facilities assessment and the library’s long-running need to address an aging, awkwardly laid-out building that dates largely to 1966.

Brad McKenzie of SAP Design Architects presented four approaches the firm developed after stakeholder engagement and building analysis: A) renovate the existing building and add on (tax-credit eligible renovation work); B) gut and alter the existing building with additions (not pursuing historic tax credits); C) demolish and build a new 96,000-square-foot facility; and D) repurpose the existing building for administration and construct a new library building. McKenzie said the program target is about 69,000 square feet for library functions plus roughly 27,000 square feet for administration and processing — about 96,000 total — while the existing building (excluding basement) is about 75,000 square feet.

Cost ranges presented by SAP were: option A roughly $36–$39 million, option B $45–$47 million, option C $53.5–$56 million, and option D in the mid-range. McKenzie said historic rehabilitation work is eligible for a roughly 40% federal/state historic tax credit, but those credits apply only to renovation work inside the existing historic structure, not to new additions.

The board and presenters discussed schedule and next steps. SAP recommended an October decision to proceed to an RFQ for design and construction management to allow potential construction starts in early 2027. McKenzie cautioned the Landmarks Board and State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) review process could extend timelines if the board seeks to demolish or substantially alter historic fabric; he described the approvals path and noted that pursuing tax credits can lengthen pre-construction work but reduce net project cost.

Security, accessibility and operations were recurring topics. Hunt and McKenzie detailed building shortcomings: a single ADA restroom on site, poor sight lines, antiquated elevator capacity, inconsistent access control with many keys instead of card systems, and a floorplate that makes adding electrical and data infrastructure difficult. McKenzie said energy-efficiency upgrades are more limited when retaining historic fabric; full new construction would allow the greatest operational efficiencies.

Board members pressed about safety and cost. Board member Wanda Brownlee Page asked whether plans had considered a safe room for severe weather; McKenzie replied his firm designs safe rooms and that a true ICC 500-rated safe room would add cost — roughly 25–30% to the cost of the room itself — and that FEMA funding is sometimes available for community safe rooms. He said whether a safe room is added, who it must serve (building occupants only or the broader community) and whether it requires exterior access are variables that affect both design and cost.

The board also discussed temporary relocation during construction. Both presenters said temporary-location costs were not priced into the presented budgets because those costs vary widely by option and by available alternate facilities; Hunt said the library and district would first explore existing district-owned spaces and lower-cost options such as hold lockers or limited storefront service for the public, and that the library’s operating budget could help absorb modest relocation costs.

On funding, Hunt said the district’s library capital cash balance would cover most options without issuing new debt if the board chose to dedicate a large portion of reserves; she offered an example where dedicating $38 million to the project and using a lease-purchase approach for remaining costs would spread payments over 10–20 years. Board discussion also referenced a foundation pledge: members of the KCK Public Library Foundation and the community advisory committee said the foundation has agreed to pursue up to $20 million from philanthropy after the board makes a choice on the project.

Public commentary after the presentation emphasized urgency and community expectations. Jim Schroeder, co-chair of the community-based advisory committee and a member of the KCK Public Library Foundation governing board, urged the board to deliver "a true downtown beacon where people feel welcome, safe, comfortable, and connected," and said the public-facing design should feel new even if some historic fabric is preserved.

Board president Randy Lopez and staff closed the item by scheduling further discussion: the board will revisit potential next steps at its Oct. 28 business meeting. For now the board accepted the presentation and Hunt’s director report as informational.

Ending: The board did not select a single option at the Sept. 23 meeting; members asked staff to return with additional cost, schedule and funding details. If the board opts to proceed in October, SAP recommended issuing an RFQ for design/CMAR and said construction could begin as early as 2027 depending on the option chosen and permitting/approval timelines.