I wasn't sure if this thread belonged in KC Sports, MO burbs, KS burbs, or what. So here it is in General Discussions:
County says no to 'one-state' plan
By:Rob Roberts, Johnson County Sun
As Yogi Berra might say, it looks like deja vu all over again.
Reminiscent of a scenario that angered local politicians and chamber of commerce leaders last December, the Jackson County Legislature on Tuesday, without giving their Johnson County counterparts so much as a heads up, advanced a bistate sales tax proposal aimed at getting the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals to remain in Kansas City, Mo.
As a result, six of seven Johnson County Commissioners stand opposed to the new bistate proposal and the other, a former member of the Kansas City Chiefs, says he is undecided about the initiative.
The Missouri lawmakers didn't specifically act on that new bistate initiative on Tuesday. Rather, they unanimously approved a memorandum of agreement, under which the Royals and Chiefs would sign new 25-year stadium leases in exchange for $177 million each in regional tax support for stadium improvements.
A bistate sales tax, however, is the only regional funding source that has been discussed as a reasonable option for raising the $354 million necessary to seal the stadium deal.
Prior to the Jackson County Legislature's meeting on the issue Tuesday, the county's communications coordinator, Ken Evans, stressed, "This is absolutely not bistate that's being discussed today. These are, very simply, the leases that Jackson County has with the teams for the use of the Truman Sports Complex."
Later in the conversation, however, Evans added that the job of finalizing the leases had been on a "to-do list" given to Jackson County government in July by a group studying the future of bistate taxation.
The first, and thus far only, bistate tax - an eighth-cent sales tax - was approved by voters in Jackson, Johnson and Clay counties in 1996 and raised $118 million in four years for Union Station and Science City in Kansas City, Mo.
Since then, several Johnson County sources said this week, Jackson County officials seem to have forgotten state law on both sides of the line states that any bistate tax issue must be passed by voters in Jackson and Johnson counties.
"This isn't a bistate, it's a one-state tax," said Annabeth Surbaugh, chair of the Johnson County Commission. "There has been no sitting down and talking across the state line to come up with this proposal."
If there had been, Surbaugh added, the Jackson County officials would have learned that their counterparts are disinclined to raise sales taxes for anything besides public education at this point.
"I couldn't support putting it on the ballot in 2004 as proposed," said Surbaugh.
Similar to the bistate proposal discussed last December, then shelved, the tax now being discussed by Jackson County officials is a 25-year, quarter-cent tax. If that tax were approved by voters in five metro counties in November 2004, as proposed, it would raise an estimated $1.25 billion for stadium improvements and metrowide arts programs.
The proposal first resurfaced in Jackson County last week, prompting Johnson County political and business leaders to protest that they'd again been blindsided.
Prior to that initial discussion before the Jackson County Legislature, Evans said, his boss, Jackson County Executive Katheryn Shields, "did call and left a message for Annabeth Surbaugh."
"Knowing that had been a concern last time around, the contact was made," he added, "but (Surbaugh) wasn't in."
Surbaugh wasn't buying it.
"I received no call" last week, Surbaugh said. "Katheryn did call me today to say the County Legislature was going to introduce the memorandum of understanding. ... But she was just calling me so she could say she called before it was in the newspaper."
Besides the seeming arrogance on the part of Jackson County officials, Surbaugh added, another "part of the problem is that the (bistate study) group met with pledges of silence."
Thus, if there have been any Johnson County residents involved in the renewed bistate effort, they haven't been publicized.
According to Evans, "there are lots of people from Johnson County who have been at the table and will continue to be at the table."
But when asked to name them, he said, "I don't have a list." And when he was asked to name one, Evans said, "I don't want to get into that."
Later, Evans added that the Community Foundation and Chamber of Commerce of Greater Kansas City, both of which involve residents on both sides of the state line, had been involved in the renewed bistate discussions.
The only member of the Johnson County Commission who has been involved in any bistate discussions, however, is Dave Lindstrom, a former defensive lineman for the Kansas City Chiefs.
Lindstrom acknowledged Tuesday that he had met in August with Jack Steadman, the Chiefs' chairman of the board.
"It was nothing official," Lindstrom said, "and I don't know that we talked about the political aspects of this. We just talked about what the bistate would mean to Arrowhead Stadium and what the Chiefs were hoping to accomplish. They want to be competitive with the other teams in the NFL, and they believe they need to improve the stadium."
Lindstrom, who serves as a Chiefs Ambassador and sometimes travels with the team, said he did not believe he had a conflict of interest on the issue.
"But I am still actively involved with the Chiefs," he added, "and if that were to cause a problem, I would have no problem recusing myself."
In the meantime, Lindstrom said, he is reserving comment until such time as a formal proposal is presented to Johnson County government.
That would happen in the event that bistate leaders decided to place the issue on the Johnson County ballot in an expedited fashion - by a vote of the Johnson County Commissioners.
In the summer of 2002, the Greater Kansas City Chamber decided to put a bistate proposal on the Johnson County ballot via the other method - petition. The chamber, using paid signature collectors, was successful in their petition drive. However, the issue, a proposed 20-year, one-eighth cent tax, was withdrawn in July 2002, after the chamber determined the issue would be doomed at the polls because of the weak, post-9/11 economy.
Though the issue currently being discussed calls for doubling the bistate tax rate and charging it for five years longer than was proposed in 2002, the sports teams would receive only about half as much as the $736 million discussed last November.
Still, spending millions on sports teams that still have 12 years remaining on their stadium leases doesn't make sense to some Johnson County commissioners.
According to Commissioner Dolores Furtado, she believes Jackson County, Chiefs and Royals leaders may be trying to capitalize on the teams' recent on-field successes by rushing the lease issue.
"I say cooler heads must prevail," Furtado added. "I'd like to see more dialogue."
Having just returned from New England, where she saw "big signs all over the place for (the Patriots') Gillette Stadium," Furtado believes a similar sponsor could reduce the amount taxpayers need to pay for stadium improvements here.
"At this point, I can't say I support it," she added of the bistate proposal. "Twenty-five years is a very long time, and sales taxes are regressive. They hit our people on limited incomes."
Further, Furtado said, she is inclined to agree with Surbaugh that any additional sales tax revenues in Johnson County should be channeled toward public schools.
"Chairman Surbaugh hit the nail on the head when she noted that our schools are our most immediate priority, and we must deal with school finance before we tackle the stadiums," Commissioner Ed Peterson agreed.
If a bistate initiative does move forward, he added, it "should be for the benefit of arts and cultural organizations as was originally suggested for the bistate tax."
"I am not convinced that a sales tax is the fairest way to address the needs of the stadiums," Peterson said. "Also, I question why we would help the two stadiums and not the (Kansas Speedway) raceway with a Bistate initiative."
Added Commissioner Doug Wood: "I believe there are other ways to finance and pay for the improvements to the sport stadiums. Those who benefit and enjoy the facilities should bear the cost of the improvements.
"I also think there are other projects of equal importance for the economic well-being of the entire metropolitan region, such as mass transit and commuter-rail service.
"Perhaps the current bistate compact should be amended to make it into a Bistate Transportation Authority."
Commissioner Susie Wolf was the only member who favored putting the bistate question on the ballot. But in explaining that position, she said, "I just think I have an obligation to put it on the ballot so the people of Johnson County can be the final decision makers."
Personally, she said, she couldn't support the bistate proposal unless it included significant direct benefits to Johnson County.
Commissioner John Toplikar was the only member who didn't return phone calls on the issue. But Toplikar's position on the bistate tax has been clear. He has consistently opposed all bistate tax increases.
source
Here we go again, more bistate bickering.
Here we go again, more bistate bickering.
Oops, didn't see the bistate thread below 