aknowledgeableperson wrote: ↑Mon Aug 02, 2021 6:00 pm
Didn't know that Orchard Park was in downtown Buffalo. https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/ne ... ar-AAMP4CX
"According to The Buffalo News, Pegula Sports and Entertainment pitched a $1.1 billion proposal for a new stadium in Orchard Park. It would be $1.5 billion when you add in renovations for KeyBank Center. And they want the taxpayers to pay for it."
I watched a local news outlet talk about downtown Buffalo as a possibility, and they spoke about the benefits of it. But I do think it's interesting that you mention $1.1 to 1.5 bil coming from Buffalo but we pretend here it's impossible to get money...in a metro twice the size. Go ahead, give your excuses for why it's "different here" but the bottom line is if tiny Buffalo is gonna crank out $1.5 bil, any metro can if it comes to it.
P.S.- I did find it funny that nobody on this Buffalo news report said anything like "gee we have perfectly good facilities right now, why get anything better?"
Buffalo has been struggling with how to deal with that stadium for a long time and there is constant threats of the Bills leaving for a larger market (Toronto comes up often). They have a long way to go still. Also, Buffalo and the MO side of KC are about the same size. That is one of KC's biggest problems. KC is already a relatively small major league market, but the MO side alone has to carry the funding weight of the entire metro and much of that is on KCMO and Jackson County alone.
That's why you will never see a new stadium like you see in other markets. In KC, You will see either another reno or a very very cheaply done new stadium thrown up somewhere with minimal infrastructure improvements, no real "mass" transit etc. A proper new downtown stadium with all the needed infrastructure improvements would cost 1.5 billion not including transit improvements. KCMO, MOdot etc would try to be all in for like 400 million, a cheap stadium surrounded by crumbling roads, sidewalks and bridges that will bog down terribly before and after games. May as well keep the TSC.
And even the MO side of KC is fragmented with no regional leadership. With the right leadership, I do think people in multiple counties would support major investments, but that leadership is not really even there on the KCMO level, let alone on the KCMO + suburban Jackson/Clay/Platte/Cass county level.
I honestly just don't see it happening and I'm honestly not sure it should happen. Parts of KCMO are decent, but so much of the city still needs billions of infrastructure improvements including most of downtown and midtown outside the P&L district. The sidewalks, the parks system, the highway system (in downtown area but also out to stadiums) etc is all is really bad shape or just super dated compared to most major cities.
I just think the stadiums are fine and the metro should be doing some other things. But that's my opinion.
I disagree with you a little. The royals ownership group is stacked with people that could raise money. The land is there.
I think you could easily bring in Cordish to any plan.
KC has amazing sports architecture that will kill to build this. Dunn is an owner right next door.
They could make East village work. It'll just take a ton of work.
It really depends on what the teams want. Do the teams want to stay in TSC or a new build? They may weigh what the most money they can get, because that increases the value of their franchise. Both Hunts and Royals ownership groups have pretty strong local ties and I don't see them as being inclined to move cities. I could see somehow KS throws stupid money to build a Foodball stadium out by the Legends as the only real competition.
I think my perferred option is streetcar to TSC, move Royals downtown and renovate Arrowhead and build a entertainment village next to Arrowhead in their location with new/better hotels, bars, etc. to keep Chiefs happy. Renew the stadium sales tax and through some TIF bonds to get it done. Voters will like it because more mass transit, keeps the teams in town and happy.
Can't remember which person here said this before (maybe DColeKC?) but one of the Royals owners is the head of loans at Goldman Sachs. That might come in handy.
AlkaliAxel wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:18 pm
Can't remember which person here said this before (maybe DColeKC?) but one of the Royals owners is the head of loans at Goldman Sachs. That might come in handy.
Head of investment banking. Goldman Sach’s stadium financing group is under his control
WoodDraw wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 3:03 pm
They could make East village work. It'll just take a ton of work.
And take a ton of money.
So for those who want a downtown stadium how do you propose to finance it? People in Jackson County outside of KCMO city limits wouldn't favor a tax increase for a downtown stadium. I guess the Sports Authority still has its tax exempt status so it could issue a ton of revenue bonds but how would the bonds be paid off? The Port Authority could also issue revenue but again how would the bonds be paid off. They could create a bi-state tax authority, like for Union Station, but I seriously Kansas voters and lawmakers would right now be in the mood for something like that. The Royals could possibly kick in some funds but it would likely be a token amount. And don't depend on other Missouri counties around Kansas City for support, they would just see it as an attempt by KCMO to steal their money. I think the state of Missouri is also out of the equation for money except for a token amount. So that leaves it up to KCMO taxpayers. How much of a property tax increase, E-tax increase, sales tax increase, hotel/motel tax increase would be needed to pay the city's share of building and infrastructure costs? And let's not forget to figure in the cost of inflation.
WoodDraw wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 3:03 pm
They could make East village work. It'll just take a ton of work.
And take a ton of money.
So for those who want a downtown stadium how do you propose to finance it? People in Jackson County outside of KCMO city limits wouldn't favor a tax increase for a downtown stadium. I guess the Sports Authority still has its tax exempt status so it could issue a ton of revenue bonds but how would the bonds be paid off? The Port Authority could also issue revenue but again how would the bonds be paid off. They could create a bi-state tax authority, like for Union Station, but I seriously Kansas voters and lawmakers would right now be in the mood for something like that. The Royals could possibly kick in some funds but it would likely be a token amount. And don't depend on other Missouri counties around Kansas City for support, they would just see it as an attempt by KCMO to steal their money. I think the state of Missouri is also out of the equation for money except for a token amount. So that leaves it up to KCMO taxpayers. How much of a property tax increase, E-tax increase, sales tax increase, hotel/motel tax increase would be needed to pay the city's share of building and infrastructure costs? And let's not forget to figure in the cost of inflation.
100% property and sales tax abatement for the stadium and a broader redevelopment district.
AlkaliAxel wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:18 pm
Can't remember which person here said this before (maybe DColeKC?) but one of the Royals owners is the head of loans at Goldman Sachs. That might come in handy.
Head of investment banking. Goldman Sach’s stadium financing group is under his control
This is an obvious conflict of interest and any company with competent management wouldn't allow him to participate in any decision in which he's an interested party, so I wouldn't count on the Royals getting some kind of sweetheart deal out of this.
AlkaliAxel wrote: ↑Fri Aug 06, 2021 4:18 pm
Can't remember which person here said this before (maybe DColeKC?) but one of the Royals owners is the head of loans at Goldman Sachs. That might come in handy.
Head of investment banking. Goldman Sach’s stadium financing group is under his control
This is an obvious conflict of interest and any company with competent management wouldn't allow him to participate in any decision in which he's an interested party, so I wouldn't count on the Royals getting some kind of sweetheart deal out of this.
I don't think anyone expects a sweet heart deal. its about the ownership team being made of experts in each aspect of building
They just made a GREAT point on 610 sports radio about the downtown stadium and local funding that I don’t think anyone has really considered yet.
When they did that stadium vote in 2006, that team was horrific and had been for 20 years. “Nobody wants to shell invest money out of their pocket for a team that is that bad and that they don’t care about.” They go on to make the point that if the Royals had taken that vote in 2015 it would’ve been a much higher percentage willing to invest public money in the team.
Radio analysis went on to say that when the Royals like heat up again in 2023 and mid 20’s, it could heavily increase interest in public financing for a new stadium, and cautioned not to take 2006 as a good example of support given that it was the lowest time in Royals history. To me, this was all a great point. People will be more willing to give public money to a team they care about.
Spending public money to subsidize billionaires' status symbol sports franchises is a stupid idea regardless of whether the public is more or less amenable to it at any given moment because of the team's performance. If Sherman wants to move the team downtown, let him pay for it himself.
phuqueue wrote: ↑Mon Aug 09, 2021 12:00 pm
Spending public money to subsidize billionaires' status symbol sports franchises is a stupid idea regardless of whether the public is more or less amenable to it at any given moment because of the team's performance. If Sherman wants to move the team downtown, let him pay for it himself.
That's fine. My point was more to the people who constantly cite 2006 as "the source" for everything about how the metro feels about public sports finances.
phuqueue wrote: ↑Mon Aug 09, 2021 12:00 pm
Spending public money to subsidize billionaires' status symbol sports franchises is a stupid idea regardless of whether the public is more or less amenable to it at any given moment because of the team's performance. If Sherman wants to move the team downtown, let him pay for it himself.
That's fine. My point was more to the people who constantly cite 2006 as "the source" for everything about how the metro feels about public sports finances.
It's not definitive but there were fights against funding in Ahaheim, Oakland, Seattle, Glendale, Mileaukee between 2006 and 2015.
Cities don't tend to fight against big projects that have public support.
normalthings wrote: ↑Tue Aug 10, 2021 10:11 am
I guess I would support a subsidy that does not exceed the economic benefit of the stadium. IE, a TIF or STAR Bond would be okay.
I'd agree with this minus the current return the Royals bring at TSC. Make your city money on increased sales taxes on food and beverage, more housing developments and taxes on businesses attracted to DT because of the stadium.
I am starting to think more and more that they are probably planning on using the Manual Career Tech/KCATA block for the new stadium. Next to the Academy and NLBM, east of Troost, Great DT view if oriented correctly, easy to acquire, and PLENTY big enough to build a modern stadium without trying to cram something into smaller space.
That said I'm still against moving the stadium.
Then again, I'm sure Cordish is pushing hard for East Village or elsewhere inside the loop.
Last edited by shinatoo on Wed Aug 11, 2021 9:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
