KCRag Forum

Aren't the Royals working directly with KCMO and NOT Jaco? Can the Port Authority issue bonds w/o a vote, I'm guessing yes. I still think the Royals end up downtown (they're not going to KS). And where is Cordish in all this? They have a vested interest in the Royals being downtown in the EC, seems like they have the pockets, along with Sherman and the Port Authority to just get this done and avoid another vote. Yes, the Chiefs will go to Jaco voters, but it will pass easily. Nobody on the MO side wants to see them in Wyandotte.

If Manny Abarca is leading this for Jackson Co you can be assured they are leaving for Kansas

GRID wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2024 3:21 pm

langosta wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2024 2:52 pm

Highlander wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2024 2:28 pm

My concern here is that Missouri will go all out to keep the Chiefs as it is the only professional football team in Missouri to the point that there effort to help the Royals situation will be watered down. I would actually rather see the state of Missouri make a greater effort for the Royals for a couple of reasons; First, they are the team more likely to leave the metro without public assistance and, second, because their needs are more specific than the Chiefs (an urban location in KCMO with potentially minimal local funds being made available).

As far as the metro is concerned, the Chiefs can simply hop across the state line to Kansas, they are going to stay suburban regardless of the state or municipality they play in. It will have little impact on the metro as a whole although it would shift the focus of where money is spent by out of towners strongly towards Johnson County rather than downtown or eastern KC. The Royals, however, have stipulated some specific conditions that cannot be met anywhere on the Kansas side of the metro. They are basically throwing everything into the downtown basket and are far more likely to leave if that does not become a reality.

I can see why Missouri would want to keep both but they will likely spend more effort on what they consider the bigger prize (the Chiefs) while the Royals, who needs Missouri more than the Chiefs, could end up getting something that is untenable over the long term for them.

Sounds like Missouri will offer a STAR esque package

How would Missouri do a STAR bond? Kansas is able to capture all the taxes generated from all that crap out there at the Legends plus whatever future development comes with a stadium. MO does not have such an area. The state would basically have to directly fund a stadium vs what is essentially a megasuperTIF which is what STAR bonds are. It would be amazing, but I don't see a new NFL stadium in MO surrounded by enough peripheral development to create that kind of cash. Not to mention such a development would cannibalize existing development that it would compete with in eastern Jackson county as WyCo is (was) a retail desert.

I think if the state is going to compete, it will take basically a multibillion dollar state handout from the state's general fund along with help from KCMO and Jackson County.

How in the world is MO going to do this for both the Chiefs and the Royals? Are they going to redirect all that money they put aside for the widening of I-70 across the state? Even that would not be enough. Is Jeff City going to even allow that much cash to flow to KC? I don't see outstate MO and St Louis politicians going along with that big of a handout especially to KC which has gotten the short end of the Jeff City stick since the start of time.

I think the Chiefs are gone. They are going to KS.

Then MO will do what it takes to keep the Royals. I hope.

I would put the probability of the Chiefs crossing the state line at 5% at this point. The state is going to do all they can to keep them in Missouri and the money required to upgrade Arrowhead is well under half the cost to build new.

Kansas Legislator adjourned 2023-24 session without taking up STAR Bonds for Chief and/or Royals. Measure is dead until 24-25 session.

https://www.kansascity.com/news/politic ... l?tbref=hp

shinatoo wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2024 8:23 am Kansas Legislator adjourned 2023-24 session without taking up STAR Bonds for Chief and/or Royals. Measure is dead until 24-25 session.

https://www.kansascity.com/news/politic ... l?tbref=hp

Could come up in the likely special session for the tax passage, but think they will have their hands full.

State Rep. Sean Tarwater slaughtered Kansas City, Jackson County and Missouri on 810 there. Said they are actively meeting with the Chiefs as they draft the star bond development bill which could be done today or tomorrow.

Said Chiefs want a 150 room hotel next to their stadium which they can't do out at the current site because it's dead area, not safe etc. Laughed and cited the abandoned Adam’s Mark hotel how that was across the street and couldn't survive. Also want some sort of concert venue or amphitheater which they can’t and won't do at TSC.

Was basically mocking Frank White saying he fumbled the ball etc and they've turned the ball over to KS.

Was adamant KS will build a Dome regardless of where the stadium is. Said they want to get the big 12 football championship game back in the region which they won't get at the current site.

Usual chat on how STAR bonds won't cost tax payer an extra penny when someone stays in a hotel or when they use any business in the local area. Gushing how Speedway paid off the bonds early. Tried to mention that if they wanted the Chiefs could build in Dodge City, which he then said obviously isn't going to happen but clearly trying to get statewide support and that this isn't simply just KC related.

Chiefs feel that what KS is offering is “incredible” and MO would have to go some way to match that. Clearly leaning towards the legends but said Chiefs have flexibility to pick a site.

Not much mention of the Royals. All focused on the Chiefs but would absolutely welcome the Royals and 81 games per year.

Said business is business in his view and Chiefs will do anything to stay in the metro, not sure about the Royals.

Law would go into effect July 1st and then a year to get it done, but there is a clause to extend although didn't say what.

Said they have projections that stadium alone will pay for itself never mind extra development.

Stated absolutely no issue (in his view) of parties being interested in bonds and surrounding development.

Cited only 40 acres needed for practice facility/HQ. Chiefs adamant that they keep large parking area for tailgating. That's something they aren't prepared to flex on.

Usual chit chat on construction jobs, Chiefs pay MO 30m income tax per year, said Chiefs moving and expanding operations in KS will pay 40m per year.

Expects a rebuttal from MO but laughed again saying that's if they can get their stuff together and added that if Frank White is involved he will ruin it.

Said design phase would take a while, a year or two following a decision made and site identified as to a shovel in the ground.

He was very very optimistic that they will get the Chiefs.

https://scoopandscoreks.com/ has just went live....

There is no way MO will keep the Chiefs now. The state simply can not or will not come close to matching what KS will offer.

And if people don't start actually thinking through the Royals situation and realize that staying at Kauffman is not an option, they are gone too, but I don't see them staying in metro KC if they don't get a downtown stadium. And if Kauffman is so great, people should probably go to it more often.

Breaking news, politician make boisterous claims publicly about how much his state will do vs. another state that is a dumb loser compared to his state. I know KS is in play and the Chiefs are not dumb, they are going to use all of this for their own benefit and go wherever the money takes them. But I'm going to take it all in stride and see what the MO side will come up it. In this case it is truly the state of MO vs. the State of KS with incentives, deals, etc. MO wants to keep the Chiefs for sure and I'm positive they will at least make a good faith effort in their proposal. Will it be enough or as good? I do not know. But I'm far from ready to declare a winner. I know there is a lot of land out by the Legends but with Barbie Land or whatever amusement park going up out there, the Giant Buckee's and the current new housing going up, space is starting to get tight.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. But I'm also fairly competent that Frank White will be bypassed but what MO does and only involve him & Jackson county where needed. He's proven himself to be a poison pill and everyone knows it. He will be bypassed for sure.

Space is not starting to get tight. The Chiefs will be East of 435. This was a forgone conclusion once the vote failed. Might as well take the Royals too while we’re at it. Then the payday loan shops downtown won’t have to worry about their rents rising.

If this failed ends up with KC getting the Big 12 championship game (and maybe much more) and the Royals end up downtown...then I'm very happy.

TheUrbanRoo wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 5:16 pm If this failed ends up with KC getting the Big 12 championship game (and maybe much more) and the Royals end up downtown...then I'm very happy.

Yeah, I don't really have a problem with it. I would rather see a new stadium at the TSC, but I just don't see the state of MO competing with KS and if they did, how would they also help build a new Royals stadium too? I mean is MO really going to just toss 2-3 billion dollars to KC? I don't think so.

Rusty Irish wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 2:59 pm Said they have projections that stadium alone will pay for itself never mind extra development.

lol, I don't know about the rest of it, but this part is a fucking joke

Also, my 4D chess take is that this gives Missouri or KCMO the perfect excuse to steal back Sporting KC.

"Oh, well you took our Chiefs so we're going to steal back SKC now."

This might really motivate MO/KC. And what's Kansas excuse gonna be? You still need SKC that bad now that you got the Chiefs?

Giving them the Chiefs could potentially make it much easier to steal back SKC.

TheUrbanRoo wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 5:56 pm Also, my 4D chess take is that this gives Missouri or KCMO the perfect excuse to steal back Sporting KC.

"Oh, well you took our Chiefs so we're going to steal back SKC now."

This might really motivate MO/KC. And what's Kansas excuse gonna be? You still need SKC that bad now that you got the Chiefs?

Giving them the Chiefs could potentially make it much easier to steal back SKC.

SKC is owned by billionaires. Thought that was a deal breaker.

TheUrbanRoo wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 5:56 pm Also, my 4D chess take is that this gives Missouri or KCMO the perfect excuse to steal back Sporting KC.

"Oh, well you took our Chiefs so we're going to steal back SKC now."

This might really motivate MO/KC. And what's Kansas excuse gonna be? You still need SKC that bad now that you got the Chiefs?

Giving them the Chiefs could potentially make it much easier to steal back SKC.

Totally sounds like something KCMO would do. Let a top tier franchise in the most important and prosperous league go in exchange for MlS soccer.

If Missouri doesn’t at least pony up to keep an NFL team I’d be shocked and disappointed.

I’m not convinced Hunt is willing to give up on one of the best game day experiences in the league for a fancy new modern stadium.

I’d disagree with your rating of the experience.

Does anyone think MO could offer a site location to the Chiefs which isn't TSC?

I think the big thing Missouri could do is just offer up a better site...like NKC or West Bottoms. This current one is just shitty.

If the chiefs move because they blame the voters for voting down their terrible plan then they are going to lose a ton of fans including me. I will never root for a Kansas based team.

langosta wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 10:32 pm I’d disagree with your rating of the experience.

Well the good thing is that’s not just my anecdotal opinion but that of hundreds of thousands of football fans, current and former players as well as about every list, publication and website that comes out with those types of rankings.