Downtown Baseball Stadium

[beautyfromashes]

I don’t want the stadium at all, quit giving tax money to loosing sports teams.

I'm curious about comments like this. If it was proven to you that money spent on stadiums can generate more money than spent, would you still disagree with it? Is it an ideological point of view or do you feel a bad financial investment expenditure?

Has it been proven? Honestly asking to be educated. Who receives the money generated? I feel like this gets lost sometimes.

My personal issue against using tax payer money has to do with (what I presume) would be an instant boost in value of the team. I don’t feel that I need to help pay for that when I won’t be compensated when they sell.

I agree that it will be great for downtown and will personally go to more games if it is. I guess I feel that’s why they should pay for it themselves…they should put a product out there at a location that supports the investment via ticket sales, suites, non-baseball events, tv revenue etc without government/taxpayer assistance. It’s more nuanced than that but that is the gist of my feelings.

For reference, David Glass bought the Royals for $96 million in 2000 and sold it after only 3 winning seasons including the 1 World Series win for $1 billion to Sherman in 2019. Forbes valued the Royals at $1.2 billion in March 2023.

Do you feel this way about all development incentives?

[TheUrbanRoo]

I more feel that I have zero trust that their boost in revenue and value would be turned into payroll and a winning team.

I know this is kinda unrelated, but I feel like the underrated reason the Royals need this new stadium is just a change of the damn vibe in this franchise. All they've ever done at Kauffman the last 40 years is lose lose lose. As long as I've grown up in KC that place has just been misery for this team. I just want a change of scenery. It might not do *anything* obv but for fucks sake can't it can't hurt at this point. Just shuffle deck and change things, anything.

[droopy]

Do you feel this way about all development incentives?

No. I’m not a developer and certainly not tax expert. My knowledge on the subject mostly has come from reading posts here. I usually support tax abatements and TIF situations. Even a user fee like the airport seems appropriate. I don’t feel taxpayers of Jackson County should pay additional taxes (including extending an already in place additional tax) for a stadium though. How was Sprint/TMobile financed? Wasn’t it via user fees in hotel room nights and car rentals?

I more feel that I have zero trust that their boost in revenue and value would be turned into payroll and a winning team.

I know this is kinda unrelated, but I feel like the underrated reason the Royals need this new stadium is just a change of the damn vibe in this franchise. All they've ever done at Kauffman the last 40 years is lose lose lose. As long as I've grown up in KC that place has just been misery for this team. I just want a change of scenery. It might not do *anything* obv but for fucks sake can't it can't hurt at this point. Just shuffle deck and change things, anything.

I agree they need to find ways to improve and win. I agree that a new downtown stadium could and should help do this. I don’t agree with taxpayers having to take that risk and don’t think sports need to be subsidized.

[TheSmokinPun]

Yeah, I'll be glad to rid myself of the usual thing I hear from other baseball fans from around the globe. "You've got a great baseball stadium for a bad team in the middle of a disastrous interstate highway."

[aknowledgeableperson]

A problem I see is with some KCMO voters for the JC tax levy. Those KCMO residents who reside in Jackson County will help pay for the stadium. Those KCMO residents living in Clay, Platte, and Cass counties will not. A Jackson County tax levy for the downtown stadium is not a fair tax for all of KCMO residents.

[beautyfromashes]

A problem I see is with some KCMO voters for the JC tax levy. Those KCMO residents who reside in Jackson County will help pay for the stadium. Those KCMO residents living in Clay, Platte, and Cass counties will not. A Jackson County tax levy for the downtown stadium is not a fair tax for all of KCMO residents.

But, how could you not say this for any tax incentive? I understand if you're diametrically opposed to incentives for anything that isn't to socially help the disadvantaged. That's a logical position. I just don't understand the difference with sports incentives vs residential tower incentives. And if the development comes to fruition the way that its been rumored, what's the difference with approving the 3/8ths tax for a stadium and other buildings when you'd likely approve the tax for just the 'other buildings' part alone? Is it because a developer like Cordish appears as a business instead of a baseball team seeming to be owned by one person with a fat wallet? Even if you hate sports, as a urban supporter, wouldn't you want the more people and vibrancy and residents that this will likely bring?

[langosta]

.

[droopy]

I like the Paul Allen clause.

The mid-size market argument just makes me think of Mario Lemieux visiting the new Sprint Center. Everyone in the world knew it was a play to get money out of Pittsburgh. And it worked.

I guess I don’t have an emotional bond to sports teams to care. The Royals can go to Nashville. Chiefs can go to Kansas. I don’t care or see why that’s a big deal. But I also think any threat of this is simply an emotional play on the fan base to pay up. Full disclosure, I say this as a lifelong hockey player/fan. I didn’t pay attention to football until I lived in Wisconsin in the Brett Favre 90s and am not a baseball fan beyond liking to go to an occasional game. I don’t watch baseball on tv but my wife is a big Cardinals fan and watches most games.

[aknowledgeableperson]

A problem I see is with some KCMO voters for the JC tax levy. Those KCMO residents who reside in Jackson County will help pay for the stadium. Those KCMO residents living in Clay, Platte, and Cass counties will not. A Jackson County tax levy for the downtown stadium is not a fair tax for all of KCMO residents.

But, how could you not say this for any tax incentive? I understand if you're diametrically opposed to incentives for anything that isn't to socially help the disadvantaged. That's a logical position. I just don't understand the difference with sports incentives vs residential tower incentives. And if the development comes to fruition the way that its been rumored, what's the difference with approving the 3/8ths tax for a stadium and other buildings when you'd likely approve the tax for just the 'other buildings' part alone? Is it because a developer like Cordish appears as a business instead of a baseball team seeming to be owned by one person with a fat wallet? Even if you hate sports, as a urban supporter, wouldn't you want the more people and vibrancy and residents that this will likely bring?

You are confusing an additional tax on a populace with a localized sales tax in a development. It's true there is a current sales tax in place that has been renewed a few times but but that tax benefits both teams at one location. Putting a baseball stadium in downtown is a much different proposal. Especially since there are many who oppose a downtown stadium and love TSC. It just gives opponents an additional reason to oppose.
TSC is considered to be a county project whereas downtown is a city project. Just a different perspective.

[beautyfromashes]

^ P&L shortfall comes from general fund. So, not much difference except different entity (county vs city). Are you saying you’re for a localized sales tax because it affects the people who use the amenity vs a larger county-wide sales tax because it affects those who might not use the amenity?

[aknowledgeableperson]

Glad you mentioned P&L. If I remember correctly that did not go to a vote of the people. A downtown stadium will go to the people to vote yea or nay. As I said people see the TSC as a county thing of which KCMO south of the river is part of, a downtown stadium will be seen as a city thing and so it should be a project supported by the whole city instead of just half.
Elections in April are usually low voter turnout. Of course opposition to a downtown stadium hasn't been organized yet. But I wouldn't be surprised if opposition doesn't become organized as plans are announced. Riding on the Chiefs coattails won't be enough, the city and the Royals have a tough sales job ahead of them. And given the latest Jackson County property tax boondoggle I see a tough road ahead for any tax proposal put forth by the county.
BTW I am neither for nor against.

[Metro]

Glad you mentioned P&L. If I remember correctly that did not go to a vote of the people. A downtown stadium will go to the people to vote yea or nay. As I said people see the TSC as a county thing of which KCMO south of the river is part of, a downtown stadium will be seen as a city thing and so it should be a project supported by the whole city instead of just half.
Elections in April are usually low voter turnout. Of course opposition to a downtown stadium hasn't been organized yet. But I wouldn't be surprised if opposition doesn't become organized as plans are announced. Riding on the Chiefs coattails won't be enough, the city and the Royals have a tough sales job ahead of them. And given the latest Jackson County property tax boondoggle I see a tough road ahead for any tax proposal put forth by the county.
BTW I am neither for nor against.

If you had to bet on it do you think it will pass? I'm going to say yes but barely

[beautyfromashes]

Glad you mentioned P&L. If I remember correctly that did not go to a vote of the people. A downtown stadium will go to the people to vote yea or nay. As I said people see the TSC as a county thing of which KCMO south of the river is part of, a downtown stadium will be seen as a city thing and so it should be a project supported by the whole city instead of just half.
Elections in April are usually low voter turnout. Of course opposition to a downtown stadium hasn't been organized yet. But I wouldn't be surprised if opposition doesn't become organized as plans are announced. Riding on the Chiefs coattails won't be enough, the city and the Royals have a tough sales job ahead of them. And given the latest Jackson County property tax boondoggle I see a tough road ahead for any tax proposal put forth by the county.
BTW I am neither for nor against.

Not sure I buy the argument that people in Smithville feel more connected to a downtown stadium than the current location and should vote for it. In the real world, people usually let a bill continue that they’ve been paying forever as opposed to a new bill that pops up that they’ll fight like crazy to stop. An expanded vote outside of Jackson is a loser. Truth be told, Kauffman is dead. The Royals have said it. And there are other locations in the city that would shell out to attract the teams. Sure, I’d still have the benefit of the team and save myself <$100 in sales tax/year. But, downtown makes the metro better. It is symbolic to all the power brokers in town that downtown is a player again and not a burden. The tax is worth it (and saves me at least $100 in gas to TSC a year). For me, it’s an easy decision.

[aknowledgeableperson]

Glad you mentioned P&L. If I remember correctly that did not go to a vote of the people. A downtown stadium will go to the people to vote yea or nay. As I said people see the TSC as a county thing of which KCMO south of the river is part of, a downtown stadium will be seen as a city thing and so it should be a project supported by the whole city instead of just half.
Elections in April are usually low voter turnout. Of course opposition to a downtown stadium hasn't been organized yet. But I wouldn't be surprised if opposition doesn't become organized as plans are announced. Riding on the Chiefs coattails won't be enough, the city and the Royals have a tough sales job ahead of them. And given the latest Jackson County property tax boondoggle I see a tough road ahead for any tax proposal put forth by the county.
BTW I am neither for nor against.

If you had to bet on it do you think it will pass? I'm going to say yes but barely

Tough to say, nine months is a long time on issues like this. I'm with you in that the election will be a close one but given the sentiment now within the county I would say it fails. The reactions to the reassessment are very strong and will definitely take some time for the county government to move pass it.

[langosta]

I have been reading a lot of comments about the K re: one of the most iconic MLB stadiums.


Is it actually? I have never heard of anyone say that outside of KC fans. I hear people saying Dodgers, Wrigley, Yankee, Red Sox but I have literally never heard this about Kauffman from anyone who doesn’t live in KC. Am I off base here or are anti new stadium fans overstating things?

[shinatoo]

Kauffman consistently ranked in the top 5 stadiums through the 90s. Saw that drop to the top 10 in the 2000s. Now usually lands around 15. The main driving factors were all the new stadiums being built. Pretty much universally loved throughout the baseball community. Typically the only knocks are the location.

From an architectural standpoint, it is unique and representative of a style that isn't seen anymore.

The Royals aren't going to stay there so it's a moot point.

[aknowledgeableperson]

The Royals aren't going to stay there so it's a moot point.

Even with no tax support?

[TheUrbanRoo]

I have been reading a lot of comments about the K re: one of the most iconic MLB stadiums.


Is it actually? I have never heard of anyone say that outside of KC fans. I hear people saying Dodgers, Wrigley, Yankee, Red Sox but I have literally never heard this about Kauffman from anyone who doesn’t live in KC. Am I off base here or are anti new stadium fans overstating things?

It’s not. KC fans are delusional about it.

Wrigley & Fenway are the only two truly iconic stadiums in MLB.

[Highlander]

I have been reading a lot of comments about the K re: one of the most iconic MLB stadiums.


Is it actually? I have never heard of anyone say that outside of KC fans. I hear people saying Dodgers, Wrigley, Yankee, Red Sox but I have literally never heard this about Kauffman from anyone who doesn’t live in KC. Am I off base here or are anti new stadium fans overstating things?

That may be true of Arrowhead but certainly not Kaufman. Arrowhead is well known in the NFL community as a very difficult place to play. Kaufman is a nice stadium but I don't think it's ever achieved iconic status. The Royals were consistently good in the late 70's and early 80's and the stadium was kind of well known at that time but it's not great by today's standards and doesn't have the urban surroundings and deeper history like Fenway or Wrigley to make it iconic. Kansas City residents tend to get sentimental about things that were once very good but have long outlived their glory years - the weird attachment to an awful airport was very similar (not that Kaufman is awful).

[daGOAT]

It might not be iconic due to its lack of history but architecturally speaking it is one of the most beautiful. If KC was a world class mega city the scoreboards backside and the fountains would make it closer to truly being iconic. I think the true factor that keeps it from being a iconic baseball stadium is the Royals didn't have alot of truly great moments or great players in the building.

Besides THE MOST ICONIC stadium in MLB was torn down.

Also Wrigley IS ONLY ICONIC DUE TO AGE the architecture is outdated and the Cubs suck worse than the Cleveland Browns.

Dodger Stadium is more iconic with its history because the Dodgers are a legacy franchise with true longevity and a rabid fan base.