The Kansas City city council’s finance committee and city Board of Parks and Recreation Commissioners both yesterday approved Mayor Quinton Lucas’s plan to open talks with the Royals on a new downtown stadium, which would involve $600 million in city money and possibly $750 million or more from the state. The full council meets tomorrow to vote on the ordinance, and since a majority of councilmembers are sponsors of the bill, we can be pretty sure how that will go.
After that, though, the stadium plan still has tons of unanswered questions. Some of that is intentional: The ordinance doesn’t actually set a deal for a downtown Royals stadium, it just authorizes the city manager to negotiate one, at which point a whole bunch more approvals will be necessary. But Lucas and the council also appear to be trying to put forward a stadium plan that is both solid and ephemeral, promising that it will keep the Royals in town for decades while providing only the most nebulous of details about how it would do so, and who would pay for what.
Let’s run through some of the more pressing questions, and see what we can come up with for answers:
Where would the $600 million in city money come from?
While the ordinance itself is silent on this matter, Mayor Lucas has been anything but, vowing that “this isn’t money that’s coming from a general fund source somewhere else. Instead, this is money, largely in our contemplation, generated currently at Kauffman Stadium. … If I never go to the ballpark, I’m not paying for this team.”
Money generated currently at Kauffman Stadium goes into the general fund, so portraying taking an equal amount of money and instead giving it to the Royals as not costing non-baseball fans anything is quite the leap of obfuscation. But beyond that, Lucas has floated the idea of creating a tax increment financing district around not just the stadium but potentially the entire Crown Center area to funnel off that $600 million worth of tax revenues — and depending on how big that district is drawn, it could easily capture spending that isn’t by baseball fans, but just by Kansas Citians who happen to be going out to eat or even visiting the aquarium in the general vicinity of a baseball stadium.
What about the state money?
The Kansas City Star cites “preliminary documents” as saying the stadium itself would be 60% publicly funded and 40% privately funded, which for a $1.9 billion stadium would come to $1.14 billion from public sources, leaving the state to cover $540 million. Lucas, though, has said that the state’s Show-Me Sports Investment Act passed last June could cover 50% of the stadium costs, which would come to more like $950 million. That act, however, provides for siphoning off all state taxes collected on spending at the stadium and on income by team employees and using them to pay off stadium costs, so the actual state cost may depend on how much money officials calculate they can find in this pot — assuming, that is, they don’t choose to go the Kansas route and define “at the stadium” as anywhere in one entire corner of the state.
What do Kansas City residents think of the plan?
Yesterday’s council meeting was open to public testimony, and KCUR reports that many citizens “echoed similar concerns that city leaders are undermining their vote against a downtown stadium, and that taxpayers’ money could be better spent on city services like schools, transportation and affordable housing” while “many business leaders and union members spoke in support of the plan, saying it will create more jobs and bring more economic development to the area.” Samples:
- “When this council decides to put public dollars to tourist attractions and billionaires, they are making a strong and clear statement that the people’s needs do not matter.” —KC Tenants organizer Mellanie Gray
- “I’ve heard some talk about the risk associated with this, but there’s risk in everything, and sometimes there’s greater risk in doing nothing. When you do nothing, you risk losing a team. When you risk losing a team… I don’t even want to think about the jobs, the businesses that we could lose if we don’t do this today.” —Downtown Council of Kansas City board officer Gib Kerr (also a real estate investor with Cushman & Wakefield, something KCUR didn’t mention)
The Kansas City Star adds: “More than one speaker referenced economic studies that have shown stadiums are not major engines for economic development. Numerous opponents referenced the 2024 vote in which Jackson County residents soundly rejected a stadium tax that would have funded a new stadium in the Crossroads District, a vote that has long plagued city and team officials.” (Yes, “plagued” — the will of the voters can be such a headache, right?)
Will a stadium and surrounding Royals development district fit on the proposed site?
This is an excellent question, and one that neither the council nor the press coverage seems to be talking about. Washington Square Park itself is only five acres, not nearly big enough for a stadium; with the addition of some surrounding buildings and a nearby parking lot, a stadium might barely be squeezed in, though renderings show it as an extremely tight fit with the stadium overhanging an adjacent street. For a stadium district, meanwhile, Sherman would likely have to buy part of all of the surrounding Crown Center, and possibly redevelop part of it for any baseball-adjacent uses he’d seek.
Has Royals owner John Sherman committed to this?
“We look very much forward to the continued process,” Sherman told KCTV. “We’ll continue our work with [city manager] Mario [Vasquez] and his staff toward an agreement as was put forth in the ordinance today.” Translation: No, not really, but he’s happy to listen to offers.
What happens now?
The Star confirms that once the details of a deal are actually hashed out, they “would have to go back before the council at a future date,” according to city staff at yesterday’s council hearing. The city would also need state approval to set up a TIF district, plus the state presumably needs to sign off on Show-Me Sports Investment Act bonds. So even if the city council approves the initial stadium measure tomorrow, there is a lot of time left for elected officials and Kansas City residents alike to ask questions about the Royals plan — which is good, because there are still a ton of answers left to be found.
Doesn’t it take at least 5 years to build a modern stadium they better get going if they’re going to do this thing. I would have to hear more on exactly where the money is going to come from and how your going to fit a stadium in 5 acres of land?
It can be done in three years or so, and there’s nothing stopping Sherman from extending his lease at Kauffman, so there’s really no hard deadline here.
As for fitting it on 5 acres, as noted above, the parking lots and the old Blue Cross building, plus maybe some accompanying parcels (or at least closing streets) could maybe get it done. They could definitely use a bigger boat, though.
Target Field is the smallest site in MLB at about 8.5 acres and it hangs over a railroad/street. I can’t fathom a site that is 60% the size of the Target Field site.
My memory of it is that MLB requires 10 acres for a stadium, and the Twins had to get an exemption to be below that.
That said, ballpark villages are a plague, and stadiums would often be better design-wise from having to fit into the existing context. This of course ignores the disaster that is government funding.
“… which for a $1.9 million stadium…”
NGL, that sounds like a bargain.
Fixed.
Kauffman Stadium is a large open air ballpark. I have been to many of the new faux retro bandbox ballparks and they often feel more like an indoor arena. Any ballpark in downtown KC will certainly be a tiny ballpark with short outfield fences.