The stadiums tax: Why you should vote NO

Voters consider community priorities against Royals agenda

By Pete Dulin

Apparently, the Kansas City Royals don’t make enough revenue at Kauffman Stadium. That’s why Question One on the April 2 ballot to establish a new ⅜ cent sales tax for 40 years boils down to one thing–money. 

It’s a big decision by taxpayers that shouldn’t be rushed.

The Royals’ and the Chiefs’ current lease continues until 2031. If a no vote prevails, then a better proposal could be developed, discussed by civic officials, thoroughly evaluated by impacted communities and voted on next year with time to spare.

It is a new tax

The proposal is a new tax. Television commercials and propaganda claiming otherwise are false and misleading. The new tax would cost taxpayers more than $2 billion over two generations, splitting the revenues to build a new baseball stadium district in the East Crossroads of downtown Kansas City and to renovate Arrowhead Stadium.

The downtown stadium proposal has generated stiff opposition.

Why a new stadium?

The K is still in “satisfactory condition,” states a Burns & McDonnell 2022 facility assessment report produced for the Jackson County Sports Complex Authority (JCSCA). Fans can enjoy a game there for years to come.

Why do the Royals want a new stadium? Money.

JCSCA Chairman Shawn Foster wrote in a March 6 letter that the Royals have made a “cost/value business decision.” They’d rather build new than renovate and they seek “different streams of revenue.”

The teams purposely created a short time table with their proposals. Representatives also hinted strongly at possible relocation, stoking emotion-driven concerns among fans. Fear isn’t helpful when making a $2 billion dollar decision. Again, there’s no actual rush for taxpayers.

The profit

Seeking more revenue (and presumably profit), the Royals plan depends on taxpayers to pay $1 billion-plus in expenses. It’s easier to turn a slick profit when someone else covers your costs.

Tax-paying residents of Jackson County (pop. 718,000) who vote on April 2 won’t run the Royals business. Taxpayers won’t receive partial ownership or profit-sharing. But if the proposal is approved, taxpayers will pay.

Fans also will still pay full price for tickets, merchandise and concessions, plus parking. Quite a business deal. 

Notably, the county must pay nearly $200 million in existing debt on the Truman Sports Complex according to The Kansas City Beacon. Once paid, the Royals can then use new sales tax funds. The Beacon reported that those funds would cover a third of new stadium building expenses. 

The team would need another $700 million or so in taxpayer dollars from Kansas City and the State of Missouri to cover the funding gap. Anticipated costs could spread to taxpayers statewide. Financial details about the proposal, actual taxpayer costs, and how funds would be spent remain unclear. 

Another reason to not rush, vote no, and buy time for another proposal.

Last year, the Royals’ average game attendance barely cracked 16,000 in a 37,000-seat stadium. Low attendance at The K has been a 20-year norm except for the 2015-16 seasons. The team doesn’t draw large crowds despite 2.2 million people living in the Kansas City metro. It’s a bad, perhaps broken, business model for making profit. 

No wonder the wealthy Royals owners want taxpayers to cover $1 billion-plus of their costs. All so that 20,000 people per game can abandon beautiful, functional Kauffman Stadium.

Goodbye tailgating. Goodbye fountains. Goodbye money spent in eastern Jackson County. Hello to sacrificing the American dream.

Local businesses and parking shortage

A downtown stadium would involve demolishing buildings. It would disrupt or displace 27 existing Crossroads businesses and nonprofits. Business owners will lose valuable locations. They’ll lose time, money and marketing invested to grow a business and attract customers. Another 40 nearby Crossroads businesses would lose traffic and sales during demolition and construction for up to five years.

Packing 20,00 people inbound and outbound will create traffic, transportation and parking challenges downtown. KC streetcars and walking aren’t magic solutions. Imagine hauling kids across city blocks on a hot, humid summer day or walking back at night to a parked car. That influx also displaces residents and people who will avoid downtown during games, reducing traffic for non-sports businesses.

Plunking a stadium in the thriving East Crossroads sends a clear message: Opening and operating a small business is not worth the investment for entrepreneurs in our city. These existing businesses boost the local economy, generate jobs, pay taxes, add cultural value and create character that makes the Crossroads distinctive. 

Millions in property tax losses

Property tax implications are another key factor. A downtown stadium would occupy six city-blocks where the Royals would pay no property taxes. The county would purchase the land and lease it to the Royals. Quite a tax break for the team but detrimental to the community.

Building the stadium means properties valued at nearly $33 million would be demolished and taken off the tax rolls, The Kansas City Star reported. Those property owners paid nearly $1 million in real estate taxes last year. 

The tax loss would also hit community and city services. Last year Kansas City Public Library drew $90,000 in revenue from property taxes, reports KCUR. That equates to $3.5 to 5 million over 40 years, a library representative said. 

Property taxes fully fund the Jackson County Community Mental Health Fund. A downtown stadium would cut $350,000 a year from their budget or $14 million over 40 years, reports The Beacon. 

Kansas City Public School District also receives funds from property taxes. The district negotiated replacement funding for property tax losses in the Royals’ proposed community benefits agreement, but failed to reach agreement on other funding. 

Non-binding agreement

Jackson County Executive Frank White Jr. responded to the Royals’ and Chiefs’ letters regarding proposed community benefits. White asserts the letters “do not represent a Community Benefits Agreement in any formal capacity. These documents offer no mechanism for enforcement by either Jackson County or our residents.” In other words, these proposals are not legally binding agreements.

Why vote no

Here’s the opportunity facing voters. A no vote leaves the option open for a different, more equitable proposal for a Royals stadium built in another location. Meanwhile, six city blocks remain privately owned and available for development. That option can generate millions in property taxes, serve the wider community, create year-round jobs and support locally-owned businesses.

With a Crossroads stadium, the county would own prime property. Community services lose funding from tax revenue. A corporate sports team pays no property tax, generates revenue and profit, and shifts $2 billion of the teams’ business costs to taxpayers. 

A yes vote means voters are less likely to approve additional tax spending on community investments such as schools, roads, transportation and housing. The Royals and Chiefs are making a business decision. Question One on the April 2 ballot represents a choice by voters to decide on priorities for their community and the future of Kansas City.

Pete Dulin has published books and articles on the local food and beverage scene. He has recently gained a large following on social media for his in-depth look into the stadiums tax. 

To read an editorial on why you should vote YES, go here.