Lawmakers want the Chiefs and Royals to come to Kansas, but the stadium plan fizzled

TOPEKA, Kan. Some Kansas lawmakers see a chance to lure Kansas City’s two biggest professional sports teams across the Missouri border, but an effort to help the Super Bowl champion Chiefs and Major League Baseball’s Royals finance new stadiums in the Kansas failed because of concerns about what it might look like to taxpayers.

Members of the Republican-controlled Legislature on Tuesday introduced a bill that would have allowed Kansas officials to authorize at least $1 billion in bonds to cover the full cost of building each new stadium, paying off the debt with tax revenue generated. in the area for 30 years. . But GOP leaders did not bring the issue up for a vote before lawmakers ended their annual session on Wednesday.

Some critics derided the plan as corporate welfare. Others were receptive, but did not want to approve the proposal until the Legislature approved a broad package of tax cuts for their constituents, which Democratic Governor Laura Kelly would sign – which also did not happen.

Lawmakers’ work on a plan began in earnest behind the scenes, after voters on the Missouri side of the Kansas City metro area decisively refused earlier this month to extend a local sales tax used to support the complex that houses the Chiefs’ Arrowhead Stadium and the Royals. ‘ Kauffman Stadium for over 50 years.

The bill’s biggest supporter, Kansas House Commerce Committee Chairman Sean Tarwater, a Kansas City-area Republican, said supporters want to give the two professional sports teams another option if they consider leaving Kansas City, which , according to him, would be devastating for both states.

“You miss 100 percent of the shots you don’t take,” Tarwater said. “We need them to stay in the metroplex.”

The idea is not dead yet.

Kelly and her team signaled Tuesday that she will likely veto the latest tax package approved by lawmakers, cutting income, sales and property taxes by a total of nearly $1.5 billion over the next three years. Lawmakers hope Kelly will call a special session of the Legislature to try to get lawmakers to approve a tax plan she will accept — and then they can consider the stadium funding proposal.

“We just need a little time to do this — we’ll be fine,” said Senate President Ty Masterson, a Republican from Wichita. “I mean, we’re serious about trying to encourage bosses to come our way.”

The proposal would allow bonds to finance 100% of the construction of each of two new professional sports stadiums with at least 30,000 seats. State and local officials would have a year to sign off, and teams would be in trouble if local tax revenues weren’t enough to pay off the bonds.

“It was just a concern to run it before we give real tax benefits to our voters — sort of a juxtaposed semblance of what corporate welfare looks like before we give tax benefits to the people,” Masterson said after deciding not to have a vote. in the Senate.

Before Missouri’s local sales tax vote, the Chiefs wanted to use their share of the revenue to help pay for an $800 million renovation at Arrowhead. The Royals planned to use their share to help finance a new $2 billion-plus stadium district that would be part of a larger national wave of sports construction.

The two teams’ current complex lease lasts through Jan. 31, 2031. Royals owner John Sherman said the Royals will not play at Kauffman Stadium after the 2030 season, the Chiefs are hopeful they will remain at Arrowhead Stadium.

“We’re going to be in a situation where we’re going back to the drawing board,” Chiefs owner Clark Hunt told reporters last week. “I feel a great sense of urgency and we will approach this from a broader perspective going forward.”

Supporters argue that Kansas’ plan is ideal because the money to pay off the bonds would come from new taxes generated only when the area around each stadium is developed. Additionally, professional players will have to pay state income tax on the portion of their winnings earned at Kansas stadiums.

But Americans for Prosperity-Kansas, a small, low-tax government group that has long opposed the use of such bonds, also opposed the stadium financing proposal. The group is influential among Republicans and told lawmakers it would consider their votes in evaluating their records.

Critics have long argued that allowing bonds to finance large projects represents the state choosing economic winners and losers rather than the free market. The same type of bonds have financed several projects, including NASCAR’s Kansas Speedway in Kansas City, Kansas.

One northeast Kansas lawmaker, Democratic Sen. Tom Holland, called the stadium proposal “economic development for millionaires.” He added that it is “absolute nonsense” for taxpayers to subsidize stadiums – either through the taxes they pay when they visit them, or because the State forgoes revenue that would otherwise flow into its coffers.

Another northeast Kansas lawmaker, conservative GOP Sen. Dennis Pyle, said, “We have a lot of priorities in Kansas, and I’m not sure this is one of them.”

Other lawmakers were critical that the Legislature did not hold public hearings or debates before three senators and three House members met in public this week to discuss details of the proposal.

“As much as I would love to see the Chiefs and Royals come to Kansas, this is a very large expenditure of tax dollars that deserves careful consideration, not a last-minute scheme,” said Democratic state Rep. John Carmichael of Wichita .

___

Skretta reported from Kansas City, Missouri.