TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — Kansas is vying to become the new home of the current Super Bowl champions, as lawmakers have approved a plan on Tuesday to attract both the Chiefs and Major League Baseball’s Kansas City Royals from Missouri.
A bipartisan legislative supermajority has passed the measure authorizing state bonds to assist in funding new stadiums and practice facilities for both teams on the Kansas side of the metropolitan area, which is split by the border with Missouri. The area has a population of 2.3 million residents and has been captivated by the Chiefs’ three Super Bowl wins in five years, along with player Travis Kelce’s relationship with pop star Taylor Swift.
The plan will now move to Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly for approval. While she hasn’t guaranteed to sign it, she mentioned in a statement that “Kansas now has the opportunity to become a professional sports powerhouse.”
Both the Chiefs and the Royals have expressed their interest in exploring options in Kansas. Although the lease on the Missouri complex with their adjacent stadiums goes until January 2031, both teams believe they should be planning for the future.
“We’re thrilled about today’s developments,” said Korb Maxwell, the Chiefs’ attorney who resides on the Kansas side. “This is very real.”
The decision follows a two-month effort to take advantage of the rejection by Missouri voters in April to extend a local sales tax used for stadium maintenance.
Supporters of the plan disregarded years of research by economists showing that government subsidies for professional sports arenas are not beneficial. They also shrugged off concerns that lawmakers were rushing the process.
A spokesperson for Missouri Gov. Mike Parson did not respond immediately to a request for comment via email. However, Kansas City, Missouri Mayor Quinton Lucas pledged to make a compelling proposal to retain both teams.
“Today was mostly, in my view, about leverage,” Lucas stated. “And the teams have significant leverage.”
Some officials in Kansas echoed similar sentiments.
“I believe the Chiefs and the Royals are taking advantage of us,” said state Rep. Susan Ruiz, a Democrat from the Kansas City area.
The votes on the Kansas stadium financing plan were 84-38 in the state House and 27-8 in the Senate. Lawmakers from various parts of the state supported the measure, despite being far from any new stadium.
The plan allows state bonds to cover up to 70% of each new stadium’s costs, with the debt being repaid over 30 years using revenues from sports betting, state lottery ticket sales, and new sales and alcohol taxes generated from shopping and entertainment districts near the new venues.
House Commerce Committee Chair Sean Tarwater, a Republican from the Kansas City area, mentioned that the Chiefs are likely to invest $500 million to $700 million of private funds in a new stadium.
“There are no unlimited funds,” Tarwater informed his GOP colleagues during a briefing.
The legislators debated the plan during a special one-day session called by Kelly to discuss tax reductions after she rejected three tax-cutting proposals before the adjournment of the regular session on May 1.
Republican leaders assured that the stadium proposal would not be brought up until the Legislature approved a plan to reduce income and property taxes by $1.23 billion total over the next three years. Many lawmakers argued that taxpayers would be displeased if the state financed new stadiums without tax cuts.
Following the passage of the tax bill, support for the stadium plan increased even among those who viewed it as a handout to wealthy team owners. Some legislators justified their support by pointing out that failing to act could lead to the teams leaving the Kansas City area, with a few stating they had wanted the Chiefs in Kansas since childhood.
“It’s incredible how quickly we can solve problems when they involve wealth, when they involve business,” said state Rep. Jason Probst, a Democrat from central Kansas.
Despite his reservations, Probst voted in favor of the bill.
“This is the system we’re in, so if we opt out of that system, we will lose every time,” he explained.
Several economists who specialize in professional sports teams have determined through numerous studies that new stadiums and surrounding entertainment areas merely divert existing economic activity from other parts of a community, resulting in minimal or no net gain.
“It might benefit Kansas while potentially harming Missouri by an equivalent amount,” stated Andrew Zimbalist, an economics professor at Smith College in Massachusetts who has written extensively on sports economics. “It’s a zero-sum game.”
A skeptical state Sen. Molly Baumgardner, a Republican from the Kansas City area, used a Christmas Eve analogy to describe supporters’ enthusiasm before casting her vote against the proposal.
“There are visions of sugar plums,” Baumgardner remarked.
Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
