New proposal moves to put stadium tax on ballot before Royals pick site or sign lease
Reality Check is a Star series holding those in power to account and shining a light on their decisions. Have a suggestion for a future story? Email realitycheck@kcstar.com.
The chairman of the Jackson County Legislature has introduced legislation that would have voters deciding in April whether to pass a countywide 3/8-cent stadiums sales tax that run out in the year 2071, 40 years after the current tax expires in 2031.
The county has yet to negotiate new leases with either the Chiefs of the Royals, which means chairman DaRon McGee’s proposed ordinance is unprecedented. The current leases were signed before the county legislature in 2006 voted to put the current sales tax up for voter approval that year.
While the language in the ordinance notes ongoing lease negotiations, nowhere does it say that signed leases must be in place before the tax measure is put before the voters.
McGee did not immediately respond to requests for comment. He‘s the sole sponsor on the proposed ordinance on the agenda posted Thursday afternoon for Monday’s weekly meeting of the county legislature.
The proposal calls for holding a special election on April 2, 2024, asking voters to approve a measure “authorizing Jackson County to impose a countywide sales tax of three-eighths of one percent for a period of forty years, for the purpose of constructing stadium park improvements to retain the Kansas City Royals and Kansas City Chiefs sports teams in Jackson County, Missouri.”
The Royals want voters to decide on a sales tax renewal in April and welcome McGee’s approach to ensuring that the measure has a place on the ballot as lease negotiations continue that would specify how the sales tax money would be spent.
“We are encouraged that the Jackson County Legislature has taken this step, which is in line with our stated goal of being on the April ballot,” the Royals said in a prepared statement. “We believe a 40-year extension of the existing sales tax will bring transformational growth to Jackson County and the region and provide the best future for both the Royals and Chiefs. We look forward to working with the Chiefs and County to earn voters’ support.”
The Chiefs agree and offered a very similar statement.
“We are in full support of today’s announcement by the Jackson County Legislature,” the team said. “This is consistent with our stated goal of being on the April ballot, which will provide Jackson County residents the opportunity to vote on an extension of the existing sales tax that supports both the Chiefs and the Royals. We look forward to working with the County to get this ballot measure approved.”
The deadline for getting something on the April ballot is in late January. A majority of the nine-member county legislature would have to approve any ballot issue by then.
County Executive Frank White Jr. is heading up lease agreements and will almost certainly veto McGee’s ordinance unless leases are signed before the ballot deadline. It would take six votes to override the veto.
The Royals announced in August that they had narrowed down their preferences for the site of a new $1 billion stadium to the East Village area in downtown Kansas City and a site in North Kansas City. But most of the focus has been on the East Village and another site downtown in the East Crossroads.
If the Royals leave Kauffman Stadium, the Chiefs have said they would like to stay at Arrowhead Stadium and build other amenities at the sports complex. Neither team has threatened to leave the Kansas City area, but members of the public and legislator Manny Abarca have raised that possibility as reasons for haste in putting a measure on the ballot.
White has said the county needs to take time to get a good deal for the taxpayers in any lease renewal.
Asked to comment on McGee’s proposal, White issued the following statement:
“I respect the teams’ deadline for the April ballot question and as committed partners, we are working to meet it. However, my responsibility is to protect taxpayer dollars and secure an equitable deal that benefits our community. I am confident we will finalize such an agreement, but until then, I cannot support any ballot issue.”
The proposal notes that the new tax would not be an extension of the current one. The county’s bond counsel said a new tax would be needed to fund two separate projects.
This story was originally published December 14, 2023 at 2:12 PM.
