Saturday Column: Bioscience agency should return to original mission

On April 19, 2004, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius signed the Kansas Economic Growth Act, which created the Kansas Bioscience Authority.

At that time, the Kansas Legislature declared, “The mission of the Kansas Bioscience Authority is to make Kansas the most desirable state in which to conduct, facilitate, support, fund and perform bioscience research, development and commercialization, to make Kansas a national leader in bioscience, to create jobs, foster economic growth, advance scientific knowledge and improve the quality of life for the citizens of the state of Kansas.”

The legislation was passed by votes of 121-2 vote in the House and 38-2 in the Senate. The co-sponsors were Sen. Nick Jordan and Rep. Kenny Wilk.

The KBA was an innovative, almost “first-of-its-kind,” program to identify Kansas as a state that was open for business and wanted to help attract new business, new payrolls and new taxpayers and make advancement of bioscience technology a priority for the state.

Soon after the KBA was in action, Texas Gov. Rick Perry cited the Kansas Economic Growth Act as he tried to rally similar efforts in his state that would help Texas universities attract eminent scholars. He said, “and Kansas, yes Kansas, is investing half a billion dollars in biotechnology. We can’t afford to be left behind.”

The Kansas Bioscience Authority started off with much success with firms such as Prescription Solutions coming to Kansas with a projected payroll of 1,350 within three years (which it has exceeded). For Hospira in McPherson, KBA worked out a plan to attract recent Kansas University and Kansas State graduates for senior positions. Hospira hoped to add another 170 jobs within a few years and, in fact, has added more than 500. Quintiles in Kansas City had an initial goal of 750 new jobs within three years, which it has exceeded. And, Jacam, a Sterling, Kan., company, with a small payroll has enjoyed huge success. It enlarged its payroll and recently was bought by a Canadian firm for approximately $250 million. The new owners intend to remain in Kansas and expand their operation.

KBA officials were active in seeking and recruiting companies, and plans called for the creation of “eminent scholars” and “rising star scholars” programs for KU, KSU and Wichita State to advance the state’s research expertise in biosciences.

Next week, there will be a grand groundbreaking ceremony in Manhattan for the huge and critically important National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility. This project was sought by many states and is a major win for Kansas. The KBA played an early and important role in this effort, organizing meetings with Washington political and administrative leaders.

KBA allocated approximately $30 million to the successful effort by KU Medical Center officials to achieve the prized National Cancer Center designation.

But the early successes slowed, KBA lost favor among many state legislators, and, earlier this week, a bill was introduced that would close down the KBA.

What happened? Basically, it’s been a matter of politics and ego.

First, in its initial stages of creation, the KBA sounded like a good idea, but no one was sure just how successful it might be. It turned out to be so successful that some in Topeka decided it might be politically smart to make their own mark on the KBA.

Kansas City businessman, developer and former Kansas Board of Regents chairman Clay Blair was the first and highly successful KBA chairman. He personally recruited many of the companies that came to Kansas but he was dumped for phoney and political reasons.

At the outset, KBA directors emphasized the importance of taking partisan politics out of the picture. Doing what was best for Kansas was the only goal. Unfortunately, politics did enter the picture through board appointments and leadership positions.

The direction of the KBA was altered. Originally, the primary effort was to attract new businesses, new jobs, new and added tax revenues and enhance and enrich the scientific research climate in Kansas. New board members and officers changed this focus and invested millions of dollars in venture efforts with companies and firms in other states. The KBA hoped to generate income from these investments — apparently with the intention of using that money in Kansas — but it didn’t work out as well as expected.

Growing numbers of state legislators lost enthusiasm and support for the KBA and started reducing the level of state funding for the agency.

Now, another political motivation has entered the picture with some legislators suggesting that closing KBA would provide money that then could be used by legislators and/or the governor to help fill the huge fiscal gap facing the state.

The possible demise of KBA sends a bad message about Kansas. Whereas the start of KBA and its early successes delivered a strong, positive message about the state that would cause entrepreneurs, business executives, scholars and dreamers to consider Kansas as a site for their plant, research facility or university affiliation, talk of shutting down KBA or even transferring or embedding its efforts in the Kansas Department of Commerce sends the opposite, negative message.

Kansas needs a strong, clean, properly directed KBA with a renewed dedication to its original mission statement.