FIELD OF SCHEMES (website)
Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2006 9:41 am
Anyone who's interested in stadium data, can check out this site. It's pretty anti-stadium of course, but has good data:
http://fieldofschemes.com/
Here's what they say about the KC situation:
Neil, I hear rumors that the Chiefs are using a threat (real or implied) to move to Wyandotte County as a bargaining chip. I investigated the possibility a few months back and it doesn't seem likely they would move. Here are some thoughts on that probability. Wyandotte County has 1/5 the population and 1/5 the income as Jackson County, so they can't afford the Chiefs even if they wanted to.
The conservatives in Johnson County would oppose any attempt to import the Chiefs and their $5.5 million per year local subsidy. It would have to be financed entirely by the state. With Kansas currently $4 billion in debt, the over $1 billion cost (interest and principal) needed to satisfy the Chiefs represents 1/4 of that debt. I am convinced I can make a better case against the stadium than proponents can for a stadium. Dont forget that in the year 2000, Missouri income was $20 billion while Kansas could only muster $10 billion. There is not much economic benefit for western Kansas in an eastern border stadium. Also, 60 Kansas legislators signed the TABOR pledge. 58 Kansas legislators voted as fiscal conservatives over 80% of the time last year (fact from the Kansas Taxpayers Network). Some of these are the same people but it does indicate conservative consistency in money matters. Another factor is the Kansas Supreme Court who last year ordered the spending of $400 million for education in 2005, and another $400 million in 2006. A plan to repeal the business equipment tax would require cost $300 million. A stadium would cost another $1 billion. Kansas would have to find an extra $1.7 billion in an election year.
Look at it this way. If the Chiefs really want to move to Kansas (or elsewhere), what better way to set the stage than to insist on a tax they know will not pass. If, In November of 2006, Jackson County rejects the tax, they will go into default and the Chiefs could leave without penalty. Could it be that the Chiefs are not negotiating in good faith? Maybe it could be financed by a Bi-State tax. You know, a tax that leaves Missouri residents last in line for tickets. I estimate the chance of that happening somewhere between zero and none. The financial picture is very different when you are being asked to pay a 1/2 cent sales tax (Bi-State II) than when you are asked to increase your total state debt by $1 billion, plus add a yearly $8.5 million subsidy. For Kansas, it's a lose-lose situation.
The obvious solution is for Jackson County to ask voters for an $80 million tax (over 4 years) and tell the Chiefs, "Your tax won't pass. We are going for the $80 million to lock you in for 10 years and we'll talk to you about nine years from now." Think about it! Wayne Flaherty
Posted by: Wayne Flaherty at January 21, 2006 04:19 PM
http://demause.net/mt/sw/mt-search.cgi? ... ansas+city
http://fieldofschemes.com/
Here's what they say about the KC situation:
Neil, I hear rumors that the Chiefs are using a threat (real or implied) to move to Wyandotte County as a bargaining chip. I investigated the possibility a few months back and it doesn't seem likely they would move. Here are some thoughts on that probability. Wyandotte County has 1/5 the population and 1/5 the income as Jackson County, so they can't afford the Chiefs even if they wanted to.
The conservatives in Johnson County would oppose any attempt to import the Chiefs and their $5.5 million per year local subsidy. It would have to be financed entirely by the state. With Kansas currently $4 billion in debt, the over $1 billion cost (interest and principal) needed to satisfy the Chiefs represents 1/4 of that debt. I am convinced I can make a better case against the stadium than proponents can for a stadium. Dont forget that in the year 2000, Missouri income was $20 billion while Kansas could only muster $10 billion. There is not much economic benefit for western Kansas in an eastern border stadium. Also, 60 Kansas legislators signed the TABOR pledge. 58 Kansas legislators voted as fiscal conservatives over 80% of the time last year (fact from the Kansas Taxpayers Network). Some of these are the same people but it does indicate conservative consistency in money matters. Another factor is the Kansas Supreme Court who last year ordered the spending of $400 million for education in 2005, and another $400 million in 2006. A plan to repeal the business equipment tax would require cost $300 million. A stadium would cost another $1 billion. Kansas would have to find an extra $1.7 billion in an election year.
Look at it this way. If the Chiefs really want to move to Kansas (or elsewhere), what better way to set the stage than to insist on a tax they know will not pass. If, In November of 2006, Jackson County rejects the tax, they will go into default and the Chiefs could leave without penalty. Could it be that the Chiefs are not negotiating in good faith? Maybe it could be financed by a Bi-State tax. You know, a tax that leaves Missouri residents last in line for tickets. I estimate the chance of that happening somewhere between zero and none. The financial picture is very different when you are being asked to pay a 1/2 cent sales tax (Bi-State II) than when you are asked to increase your total state debt by $1 billion, plus add a yearly $8.5 million subsidy. For Kansas, it's a lose-lose situation.
The obvious solution is for Jackson County to ask voters for an $80 million tax (over 4 years) and tell the Chiefs, "Your tax won't pass. We are going for the $80 million to lock you in for 10 years and we'll talk to you about nine years from now." Think about it! Wayne Flaherty
Posted by: Wayne Flaherty at January 21, 2006 04:19 PM
http://demause.net/mt/sw/mt-search.cgi? ... ansas+city