KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Clark Hunt wants a dome. The Chiefs’ owner can visualize the potential next chapter of his franchise, one that could begin in just six years.

“I do think for the community, a dome would be a tremendous asset,” Hunt said in late March at the NFL’s annual league meeting. “It would give the Kansas City region an opportunity to host significant events.”

Advertisement

The Chiefs’ stadium question is about to reach a couple of key checkpoints. By the end of June, the franchise hopes to decide which side of the Missouri-Kansas state line the team will play its home games after the 2030 season. With that timeframe in mind, Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe has called the general assembly back for a Tuesday special session, in part to discuss the stadium tax-incentive program.

The most ambitious option for the Chiefs — who are considering renovating Arrowhead Stadium or building a state-of-the-art venue — involves the construction of a dome in Kansas that would cost an estimated $3 billion.

That option has already led Hunt and team president Mark Donovan to answer the question of whether a dome in Kansas would guarantee higher profits for the Chiefs and lead to more lucrative, alluring opportunities for the region.

“Yes,” Donovan said at the league meeting. “It’s definitely part of the conversations in Kansas. This is one of the reasons you do this.”

In less than a decade, the Chiefs have become the NFL’s most prominent franchise in terms of marketing and elevating TV viewership, boosting the league’s business growth in the United States and around the world. The Chiefs are also the first team in NFL history to reach five Super Bowls in six seasons. Hunt knows a dome would further propel his franchise.

A domed stadium — similar to venues such as SoFi Stadium (Los Angeles Rams and Chargers), Allegiant Stadium (Las Vegas Raiders) and U.S. Bank Stadium (Minnesota Vikings) — would allow the Chiefs to host numerous events: the Final Four, a College Football Playoff game, the Big 12 football championship game, more concerts, college bowl games and WWE events.

🇺🇸 New Design: New Kansas City Chiefs Stadium The stadium is to be fully covered. It will cost around $2-3 billion to build the venue. 🔗 https://t.co/dkoMSmZRfs 📸 MANICA pic.twitter.com/YyMnKu7eU3 — StadiumDB.com (@StadiumDB) June 4, 2024

Hunt believes a dome would give the Chiefs the chance to host a Super Bowl.

“We’re doing really, really well as a franchise,” said Donovan, who is on the NFL committee that selects Super Bowl sites. “One of the highest compliments Clark has ever (given) me and our (business) team, as we’re looking at the two options, is you guys are maxing out this market at Arrowhead.”

Advertisement

In the past year, legislators in Missouri and Kansas have battled, publicly and in their legislative sessions, to present the best financial framework and political support to attract the Chiefs. Legislators in Kansas, with bipartisan support, approved state bonds last summer to aid in financing new stadiums and practice facilities for both the Chiefs and Kansas City Royals. If the Chiefs move to Kansas, the state bonds could cover up to 70 percent of the cost of building a new stadium. The bonds would then be paid off over 30 years through revenue from sports betting, state lottery ticket sales and new sales and alcohol taxes collected from an entertainment district built around the stadium. The bonds expire June 30 but could be renewed for another year.

“Hypothetically, as you’re trying to figure out how to put a deal together, if you’re on either side of the table, you look at deadlines,” Donovan said. “That June 30 (deadline) is real.”

The NFL’s G-5 program, which allows a team to borrow up to $300 million for projects if it matches with its own money and receives government assistance, would help support the construction of a new stadium in Kansas. The loan is repaid through revenue sharing and premium seating revenue.

In response to Kansas’ aggression, Kehoe’s “Show Me Sports Investment Act” would allow Missouri to cover up to 50 percent of stadium construction costs through state-issued bonds. Kehoe said the plan would allow each team to bond up to the annual amount it generates in state tax revenue. The bill passed the Missouri House of Representatives earlier this month but lacked support in the Senate, which adjourned early, leading Kehoe to call the special session for next week.

Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas, a lifelong Chiefs fan who began attending games at Arrowhead when he was a child, has stressed repeatedly that he believes the teams will remain in Missouri.

Advertisement

“The way that we do our stadium obligations in Missouri is that they are publicly owned as compared to what you see in Kansas,” Lucas said in August. “That makes a very big difference (in) tax implications long term. If you look at the economics, if you look at the plans the teams have said before, both teams will be in Kansas City, Mo., for years to come.”

The Chiefs and Royals, who play their games at Kauffman Stadium, share a lease at the Truman Sports Complex that runs through Jan. 31, 2031. While the Royals want to play in a new ballpark before the end of the lease, the Chiefs will play all of their home games at Arrowhead through the 2030 season.

“Both options are very much in play,” Hunt said of renovating Arrowhead or building a dome in Kansas. “Really, our timeline is driven more by having enough time to do the renovation work or the construction so that we can be in the new or renovated building in the summer of 2031. To really comfortably stay on schedule, it would be best to have some direction by the summer.”

When Donovan reflects on the Chiefs’ first misstep, he can pinpoint the day immediately: Feb. 28, 2024.

At the time, the Chiefs were the NFL’s reigning back-to-back champions, the first team to accomplish that in two decades. Two weeks after their overtime victory in Super Bowl LVIII, Donovan and Hunt were back at Arrowhead to present the future of the 53-year-old venue. Hunt unveiled renderings of what they hoped would be the next major renovations of Arrowhead, changes that would improve suites, video boards and club lounges. The renderings also showed other enhancements — suites behind the end zones, sideline clubs and concourses on the upper deck covered.

“The response was less than positive,” Donovan said. “I believe that partially people walked into that presentation wanting to see a dome and a Power & Light (entertainment district) built next to it. They didn’t see that, so it’s just, ‘What is this?’

Advertisement

“We’re not going to make that presentation again without some changes, a better picture.”

Working together, the Chiefs and Royals put forward their full plan to voters in Jackson County, Mo., just days before last year’s April election. The clubs agreed to remain in the county — with the Royals building a new downtown ballpark — for at least the next 25 years if voters agreed to an extension of the three-eighths-cent sales tax.

Royals owner John Sherman said the club would pledge at least $1 billion from their ownership group for their project. Arrowhead’s projected renovations were expected to cost $800 million. Hunt said he and his family would contribute $300 million.

Voters rejected the extension of the sales tax. The margin of defeat for the teams was overwhelming with 78,352 people voting no (58 percent) and 56,606 voting yes (42 percent).

“You learn the importance of communication and being careful with your communication,” Donovan said of last year’s vote. “It’s amazing how little things get twisted around. It’s hard to lose, man. That was a tough night, especially when you really believe it’s the right thing. The system was really good for a long time. It didn’t resonate that way with the voters.”

Arrowhead Stadium is the iconic heartbeat of Chiefs Kingdom – full of history, amazing memories, and so many more good times to come. Our vision is to elevate our unrivaled fan experience for the next generation of fans with improvements across all levels inside, new activation… pic.twitter.com/9gHLJ8MDBv — Kansas City Chiefs (@Chiefs) February 28, 2024

Several city and county leaders felt the Chiefs’ and Royals’ financial commitments weren’t enough.

Jackson County executive Frank White, who is in the Royals Hall of Fame, never fully agreed to the proposal. KC Tenants, a 10,000-member tenants’ rights and housing advocacy group, campaigned against the proposal, urging voters to reject the extension by stressing that taxpayers would pay too large a percentage to help build a new ballpark and further modernize Arrowhead.

Advertisement

“Two billion dollars in taxpayers’ money, man, could do a hell of a lot to develop our community,” Michael Savwoir, one of the union leaders with KC Tenants, told Kansas City television station Fox4 hours after the election. “The billionaires don’t finance my follies. Why should I finance theirs? I think we can all agree it was a pretty shabby job of selling anything, pretty shabby in terms of how it was delivered — the message, the deceit, the strong-arming and the extortion.”

Lesley Wright, who lives downtown and has been a Chiefs season ticket holder, voted no.

“It was a hard decision,” Wright said. “I’m the biggest advocate for a downtown stadium. I love the Chiefs and Royals, but I felt as if the plan was not put together well. I didn’t feel right about it.”

Even before legislators in Kansas approved state bonds, developers from the state had sent the Chiefs proposals for a new stadium in the past few years. In those discussions, developers have recommended multiple sites for a stadium. One logical destination would be Kansas City, Kan., near the Kansas Speedway and Children’s Mercy Park, the home venue of Sporting Kansas City.

Just weeks after the vote in Jackson County, Mo., Manica Architecture, a firm in Kansas City, Kan., that has designed several American stadiums, revealed renderings to Kansas legislators that showed a sprawling enclosed stadium with a retractable roof. If the Chiefs agree to move to Kansas, the construction of such a stadium could begin in 2028.

Throughout last season, when the Chiefs were attempting to become the NFL’s first three-peat champion in the Super Bowl era, everyone in the city — players, fans and employees of the team — had to start contemplating if Arrowhead’s future was doomed.

“Arrowhead is home for me,” tight end Travis Kelce said. “It’s a part of my heart, playing in that stadium. But the fans want what the fans want. We play for them. I think it’s up to them.”

🏟️ Arrowhead Stadium, the iconic home of the @Chiefs since 1972, is rich in history! Originally designed by architect Charles Deaton, it’s celebrated for its unique bowl shape, amplifying crowd noise to record-breaking levels (142.2 dB in 2014). In 1973, Arrowhead became the… pic.twitter.com/wzCsT44Ki4 — Pro Football Hall of Fame (@ProFootballHOF) November 7, 2024

Charles Deaton designed Arrowhead to give fans the best view possible. The stadium’s lines are symmetrical and curved, its distinctive spiral ramps dot the venue’s corners. Arrowhead has a scalloped upper deck in each end zone, giving it a unique look.

The best feature of Deaton’s design was discovered almost two decades after Arrowhead opened: It was created to produce thunderous sound. Roars from sellout crowds can be so loud that it’s similar to being next to jet engines, a rare level of crowd noise that keeps opposing players from hearing the snap count.

Advertisement

Arrowhead first set the Guinness world record for loudest stadium in 2013. The next year, after Seattle Seahawks fans broke the record, Arrowhead regained the record with the fans’ collective voices generating 142.2 decibels in a blowout win over the New England Patriots, a record that still stands.

The stadium includes an apartment, which was built to be the home of team founder Lamar Hunt. In the 1990s, Hunt used to walk the parking lots and interact with thousands of tailgating fans before games. Hunt knew the fans were a major reason why the Chiefs have one of the NFL’s best pregame atmospheres. Hunt often said: “Arrowhead Stadium is my favorite place on Earth.”

Arrowhead is the league’s third-oldest venue. Clark Hunt and Donovan have previously expressed their desire to preserve Arrowhead, so that it can be seen as an equal of other iconic, historic stadiums such as Wrigley Field, Fenway Park and Lambeau Field.

If the Chiefs choose to renovate Arrowhead, one question looms over Hunt and Donovan: Can the city and team build an entertainment district — with restaurants, a shopping mall and hotels — in the complex, which is located in Independence, Mo.?

Last July, Donovan said the overwhelming answer he heard from developers was no.

“You’re not going to see Power & Light,” Donovan said of a potential renovation of Arrowhead. “But you could see other entities that would have some relevance to game day.”

Missouri legislators have worked to convince the Chiefs that such a possibility can become a reality.

In 2007, in the middle of their championship run, the New England Patriots built Patriot Place, a complex adjacent to Gillette Stadium. Patriot Place features 1.3 million square feet of shopping, dining and entertainment options. Lambeau Field, the Green Bay Packers’ home venue, is next to Titletown, an entertainment district on 45 acres that opened in 2017.

Advertisement

“With the vacated Kauffman Stadium footprint, there’s a lot of activity that you could do,” Lucas said. “Lambeau has been in that spot for some time, but you see a conference center and you see Green Bay using that as an economic development tool.

“We heard from the voters that said they wanted funding that was generated from the stadium itself to pay for the stadium. I think there’s a way we can get that done.”

Of course, Manica Architecture’s renderings of a potential enclosed stadium with a retractable roof included such features around the dome — hotels, restaurants, apartments, office space, an outdoor concert venue and a huge Chiefs training facility.

In November, the Chiefs hired CSL International, a market research firm, to better understand what their fans want in a renovated Arrowhead or a new stadium outside the complex. In December, CSL conducted 10 focus group sessions, in both Kansas and Missouri, to get feedback from fans. The firm also sent an email survey to more than 300,000 people, a collection of season ticket holders, past attendees of Chiefs games and other stadium events.

Hunt said, “The tailgating experience was really important to them.” The respondents also said a new stadium would need to be loud to give the Chiefs a true home-field advantage.

A wild card was recently added to the Missouri-Kansas battle with Clay County, Mo., north of downtown, holding the right to create its own sports authority. A county sales tax, like the one Jackson County voters rejected, could help fund a new stadium there.

“When you think about two different opportunities, and you talk about where to put (the stadium), they don’t care,” Donovan said of fans. “Now there are hardcore Missourians and hardcore Kansans. But as long as you’re in or around that (I-435) loop, it doesn’t matter. That’s further supported by the average travel time for a fan from this survey to a game is 70 minutes. That was helpful.”

Advertisement

Since last year’s vote, the Chiefs and Royals have worked separately on their potential stadium deals. But Donovan acknowledged that the Royals’ decision will likely have a significant effect on what the Chiefs decide. The Royals are still interested in building a downtown ballpark, but the team could agree to move to Kansas, using the state bonds to help build a stadium in a suburban area, such as Overland Park.

If the Royals announce their decision first, the legislators from the other state will likely face more pressure to land the Chiefs.

“They need to get a deal done, and we’d think it’d be a good thing for Kansas City if they get a deal done (downtown),” Donovan said of the Royals. “We need to get the best deal for us done, no matter what they do.”

Since the ballot measure failed last year, the Chiefs have made it clear to Missouri legislators that Hunt and his family are willing to contribute more than the $300 million they committed to last year.

What those legislators do next week could go a long way toward resolving the stadium saga. The Chiefs and their fans — on both sides of the state line — will be watching closely.

(Photo: Denny Medley / Imagn Images)

KSHB 41 reporter Caroline Hogan covers development across the Kansas City area. Share your story idea with Caroline .

—

While Missouri state leaders are discussing the future homes of the Royals and the Chiefs, Kansas City business leaders are discussing much more affordable housing.

Downtown Kansas City, Missouri, business leaders react to Missouri stadium vote

Those who work, live and invest in the downtown area gathered Wednesday for the monthly KC Downtowners Luncheon. They want what’s best for Jackson County, and they believe the best includes keeping the teams in Jackson County.

“You’re making an investment here that’s gonna last the next 60-100 years. Let’s do it right,” said Kelley Hrabe, a multifamily housing developer.

“The development downtown is doing very well, said Jan Marcason, a former Kansas City councilmember. “I think that [the stadium] would just be the icing on the cake.”

Eddie Crane, who lives and works in downtown Kansas City, expressed enthusiasm for a downtown location.

“I want the Royals stadium in Washington Square, like six blocks from my house. That would be dynamite,” Crane said.

Many attendees supported the passage of Senate Bill 3, also known as the Show-Me Sports Investment Act. It’s Missouri’s way of keeping the Royals and Chiefs to stay in Missouri.

The bill passed Wednesday afternoon.

“I’m really excited about getting that support from the state of Missouri,” Marcason said.

However, the vote on the bill doesn’t finalize any decisions. Kansas and Clay County are still contenders for the new stadium locations.

“Argument can be made that going out towards the Legends or some other location in Kansas still has the connectivity of sports with the soccer stadiums and the speedway out there, and I think that has some merit,” said Jason Osborne of Rosemann & Associates.

Some residents, like Crane, express frustration with the lack of concrete plans.

“It seems that we’re all adults, you can easily present a plan, you can come to a conclusion and we can move forward as a collective,” Crane said.

A baseball stadium in downtown Kansas City could be an economic game changer.

“Supporting local businesses, hanging out, buying beers, and going to all the shops, etc. They’re going to be spending the money in the local economy,” said Zach Molzer of Molzer Development.

That kind of revenue is not something KC business leaders are ready to stop fighting for.

This story was reported on-air by a journalist and has been converted to this platform with the assistance of AI. Our editorial team verifies all reporting on all platforms for fairness and accuracy.

Local Royals, Chiefs owners won’t fund all stadium costs. Why public money key to deal

Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports

As the clock ticks for Missouri lawmakers, the Kansas City Royals remain tight-lipped on a future location of a potential new ballpark, and it remains unclear which state and county in the metro will offer the most team-friendly deal — and the most public money — to help build said ballpark.

Missouri legislators are set to squabble next week over whether to offer state aid for big-ticket sports stadium construction for both the Royals and the Chiefs.

Meanwhile, Kansas’ proposed stadium incentives are set to expire at the end of June, and a top lawmaker said he is not inclined to extend the offer beyond that deadline.

The team has publicly emphasized that it has not selected any specific site yet, with possible options in Overland Park, North Kansas City and near downtown – possibly among others – still in conversation, much to the frustration of some local officials and fans.

Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas has said the years-long government and real estate speculation around a stadium plan in the absence of a decision by the team is “unfair.”

“The real story is just very simply this: They’re shopping around for the best economic deal. I get it. I understand it. We’re all big kids, and that’s what’s happening,” Lucas said in an interview with Pete Mundo on a KCMO radio interview on Thursday.

“That’s the entirety of the story. It’s not who’s the nicest. It’s not who’s the coolest. It’s not who has the best demographic information lately. It is purely about money and purely about money for teams.”

A spokesperson for Lucas’ office said in a statement on Friday that while the renewed “border war” is unfortunate for taxpayers in the region long-term, the mayor appreciates Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe’s efforts to retain professional sports teams in Kansas City and St. Louis.

Patrick Rishe, executive director of the Sports Business Program at Washington University in St. Louis, told The Star that he suspects that both the Chiefs and Royals will ultimately stay in Missouri but — like lawmakers, investors and thousands of residents — he is keeping a close eye on how far Kansas is willing to go to woo the teams.

“I know that Kansas is certainly motivated to offer significant financial inducements to entice the teams to think about moving to the Kansas side,” Rishe said. “In the midst of a financial showdown… it really comes down to, what is Missouri willing to do and what is Kansas willing to do?”

For some fans and readers, the back and forth begs a more fundamental question: Why is the team asking for so much taxpayer money in the first place instead of the teams’ owners paying for the stadiums themselves?

Public money for stadiums is the rule, not the exception

How often do professional sports teams ask for the public’s help to build their facilities? The short answer is: very often. The Royals are not an outlier.

Both across the country and historically in Kansas City, including with both the Royals and the Chiefs, professional sports stadiums are commonly constructed using public financing to help cover the costs.

However, Rishe said, the specific source of that public money varies by state and city. Sales taxes are common to help build stadiums, but some municipalities opt for lodging taxes or “sin taxes” on perceived vices like cigarette sales or gambling revenue.

Some teams also “dip into” a fund managed by the NFL to help defray the cost of a stadium that is being mostly financed by public dollars, Rishe said, or rely on loans that are later paid off by the revenue generated when a new stadium opens or reopens.

Part of the reason for frequent public assistance for these kinds of projects is that stadiums are extremely expensive. A new Royals stadium could cost more than $1 billion, while a new Chiefs stadium could cost up to $3 billion. A 2024 proposal to renovate Arrowhead for the Chiefs rang in at around $800 million.

The behind-the-scenes finances of the Royals’ ownership group and the team’s ability to get large private loans to cover the costs of building a new stadium is private information.

Over the years, team leaders have consistently described their vision for a new stadium as a “public-private partnership,” with the team making a private contribution and also leaning heavily on public support.

Only three of the 30 National Football League stadiums were completely funded with private money, according to The Week: MetLife Stadium in New Jersey, Gillette Stadium in Massachusetts and SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles.

That privately financed Los Angeles stadium came after negotiations for upgrades using public funds to the Rams dome facility in St. Louis faltered, prompting the team’s move to a much larger market in California.

Even when stadiums are built with private money, the teams could still receive public benefits related to the site, such as money spent on nearby infrastructure improvements for roads and utilities.

Busch Stadium, the downtown ballpark for the St. Louis Cardinals that opened in 2006, was mostly funded privately but used tens of millions of dollars in public funds including a county loan.

In Kansas City, the development of the $120 million KC Current women’s soccer stadium on the Berkley Riverfront was driven by private financing. But the team still got major public help to make it possible.

Through a deal with the Port Authority of Kansas City, a public agency, the team leases the prime riverfront land for only $1 a year.

The allure of public-backed stadiums

While public funding is still extremely common for stadiums, the handful of notable private projects in the past several decades mean tax money is no longer the final word in stadium financing, said Rishe.

However, economists like Rishe say that public funding has too much history — and too many advantages for teams — to fade from consideration.

A mix of private and public funding sources for major renovations or construction of sports stadiums has slowly become more common since the 1980s, Rishe said.

“There may be some people in the community who don’t care about the teams and don’t want their tax dollars earmarked for sports,” Rishe said.

And yet, Rishe said, teams have always sought mostly public funding when considering a move, considering themselves to have public value to a city or state.

“There’s some tangible economic reasons, there’s some intangible branding reasons and then there’s the negotiation and bargaining tactic aspect,” Rishe said.

Sports teams like the Chiefs and Royals are often a strong rallying point for residents, Rishe said, with fan culture serving as a “common identification symbol” for people all across the Kansas City area even if they aren’t die-hard sports fans.

“Going to a professional sporting event is not the same as going to a public park,” Rishe said. “Yet having the team in your community, there is some sense of publicly shared feeling and attributes associated with having that team in your community, and that’s part of the logic of that.”

Economic benefit, bargaining power

Public funding packages are often justified by the promise that having a professional sports team within a city could help boost the local economy, with fans and tourists spreading their dollars throughout the area of a stadium with each home game.

However, some lawmakers and researchers have begun to push back on the idea that having a sports team nearby will boost a city’s economy, Rishe said.

“There has been research and evidence that perhaps some of the claims of economic impact have been overstated in previous research,” Rishe said. “When people at the legislative level get ahold of that data, they use that against the teams to say, ‘Wait a minute, we want to help, but is that the best investment?’”

In some cases, seeking public funding has more to do with sports teams angling for the best deal on a potential move or rebuild, Rishe said.

“Historically, if existing owners don’t get what they want, it wasn’t uncommon for teams to use other potentially interested regions or cities as suitors,” Rishe said.

For either the Chiefs or the Royals, shying away from seeking public funding would stop the teams from benefiting from the ongoing bidding war between Kansas and Missouri, Rishe said.

“If ownership knew that they had an alternative location to move the team to, they could use that as a bargaining chip to try and negotiate a higher percentage of the funding to come from the public sector,” Rishe said.

The Royals and Chiefs get tax money now

Public funding asks were a driving factor at the height of the stadium relocation saga for the Chiefs and the Royals last spring, when Jackson County voters rejected a proposed new version of a sales tax that both teams have been benefiting from since 2006.

Their stadiums are currently funded by the first iteration of a similar 3/8-cent sales tax, which passed in 2006 with 53% of the vote. The tax, which expires in 2031, included a $425 million commitment from Jackson County to the two teams’ stadium costs, with the Chiefs chipping in $125 million and the Royals contributing $25 million.

The teams also currently lease public land from the county for both of their current stadiums, in the form of the county-owned and state-managed Truman Sports Complex.

The 25-year lease agreement was signed in 2006 — in conjunction with the vote — and also expires in 2031. Much of the funding from the existing sales tax goes toward paying back debt at Truman Sports Complex — including $26 million of the tax’s $48.6 million revenue in 2022, for example — along with maintenance and repairs at the existing stadiums.

If passed, the April 2024 renewal measure would have lasted 40 years for the Royals and 25 years for the Chiefs, guaranteeing that both teams stayed in the county.

Special session showdown looms

Kehoe’s proposed program would cover annual bond payments up to the amount a team generated in state tax revenue in the year before it took effect. In other words, it would cover the amount Missouri would lose if a team left for another state. Projects would also be eligible for tax credits.

There would also need to be funding from local governments, and the teams would be expected to kick in some of their own funding.

Officials in Kansas City hope to keep the teams within city limits, including the possibility of Washington Square Park near Crown Center for the Royals.

The Missouri House passed the bill during the final days of the regular legislative session in May, but it stalled in the state Senate as lawmakers’ frustrations over other priorities that fell apart boiled over.

Meanwhile, questions have swirled over whether the both teams may build new stadiums in Kansas.

Kansas legislators have offered their own program that could entice the teams to build new stadiums across the state line in the form of bonds that would cover up to 70% of costs and would be paid back by tax money generated by the new stadiums and surrounding retail alongside lottery and sports betting revenues.

The Kansas proposal is set to expire at the end of June. Kansas House Speaker Dan Hawkins said this week that he is not inclined to extend the offer and that teams should act on it soon.

The Kansas City Business Journal reported this week that an affiliate company of the Royals bought a mortgage loan tied to the Aspiria Campus at 119th and Nall Avenue in Overland Park, formerly the Sprint campus. The owners were reportedly surprised by the transaction, and Aspiria management have said they are not in talks with the Royals.

The team released a statement this week indicating that they have “made investments” in the Overland Park campus and several other sites but have not yet chosen a future home.

This story was originally published May 30, 2025 at 12:21 PM.

When Missouri Senate leaders turned to a rarely-used procedural maneuver Wednesday to cut off debate and force a vote to ban abortion and repeal a paid-sick leave law, they essentially ended the legislative session two days early.

They also sealed the fate of a litany of bills.

Among the final-day casualties:

A massive incentive package designed to convince the Chiefs and Royals to stay in Missouri;

A bill clarifying that a judge can’t prevent a divorce from being finalized just because a woman is pregnant;

An effort to reenact a law penalizing Missouri police for enforcing federal gun laws;

Legislation allowing Missouri students to enroll in neighboring school districts;

A tax-credit program aimed at improving access to child care.

It was the 5th year in a row the Senate was unable to make it to the 6 p.m. Friday constitutional deadline for the session to adjourn. Even the House decided to adjourn early, announcing that it would work on bills Thursday then head home for the year.

It marks the first time the House has not worked on the legislative session’s final day since a fixed adjournment date was set in 1952.

House Speaker Jon Patterson, a Lee’s Summit Republican, said despite the Wednesday meltdown, the Senate actually functioned much better than any year since he joined the legislature.

“With the Senate, you just have to keep your expectations in check,” he said. “But I’m actually very happy with the way things went. You can’t always end the way you want.”

Public media is under threat. Here’s how to help Take a stand for local journalism.

After years of the Senate’s discord being caused by internal GOP squabbles, Republican leaders celebrated soon after the early adjournment Wednesday by touting party unity and a host of big-ticket accomplishments.

They pointed to legislation sent to the governor enacting state control of the St. Louis police, exempting capital gains from the income tax and pumping $50 million into a private school voucher program, among others.

“This session proved what’s possible when Republicans lead together,” said Senate President Pro Tem Cindy O’Laughlin, a Shelbina Republican.

But after a mostly placid legislative session, which O’Laughlin noted last week was marked by solid cooperation with Senate Democrats, the decision to cut off debate in order to roll back two voter-approved initiatives could have long-lasting consequences.

“It’s sad. We tried. We tried to negotiate all session on these issues,” said Senate Minority Leader Doug Beck, an Affton Democrat, later adding: “You think things are going back to business as usual. I’ve heard a long time, ‘well, nobody has ever made us pay.’ You’ll find out now.”

Annelise Hanshaw / Missouri Independent Missouri Senate Minority Leader Doug Beck speaks about negotiations on a bill that seeks to establish a constitutional amendment to ban abortion.

Republicans cut off debate using a procedural maneuver known as “calling the previous question,” or PQ.

Used regularly in the Missouri House, it is used rarely in the Senate because the chamber has a tradition of unlimited debate and negotiations over difficult issues. Wednesday was the first time since 2020 when a PQ was invoked and the first time since 2017 when it was used during a regular session.

Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe spent the session’s final days trying to avoid a PQ and win support for his plan to help finance stadiums for the Chiefs and Royals.

Kehoe formally rolled out his plan Tuesday morning to cover up to half of the cost of a new stadium for the Royals and a refurbished Arrowhead Stadium for the Chiefs.

It easily cleared the House, but when it landed in the Senate, it ran into a wall of resistance.

Looking for a path forward on stadium funding, Kehoe began pushing for a compromise that could lead to a vote on his plan along with paid sick leave and abortion.

Democrats agreed to end their filibuster and allow Republicans to repeal the paid sick leave law — which voters approved in November and went into effect May 1 — as long the minimum wage would continue to be indexed to inflation.

They also were willing to let Republicans put an abortion ban constitutional amendment on the statewide ballot if they agreed to remove a provision purporting to ban gender-affirming care for minors, something that is already illegal in Missouri.

A repeal of Missouri’s abortion ban was approved by voters in November, and Planned Parenthood clinics have restarted surgical abortions for those up to 12 weeks gestation at clinics in Kansas City, Columbia and St. Louis.

“We put everything out there on negotiations, we were willing to do everything,” said state Sen. Maggie Nurrenbern, a Kansas City Democrat. “It came down to making sure that we were being honest with voters when it came to amendments that were being placed on the ballot. And to us, it is non negotiable to lie to voters.”

In the end, Republican leadership decided to deploy the PQ and force a vote.

O’Laughlin defended the move in a post on social media, declaring that while she respects her colleagues on both sides of the aisle and is willing to “work endlessly” to reach compromise, “sometimes it simply is not something we can achieve.”

“Those who support conservative measures and vote us into office expect us to stand our ground on issues which reflect their bedrock beliefs,” she said. “That is what we did and I am proud of all my colleagues for taking a stand for what we consider right.”

Democrats contend Republican leadership was not interested in finding a compromise.

“Republicans did not step up and provide leadership,” said state Sen. Stephen Webber, a Columbia Democrat.

The governor vowed Tuesday to call the General Assembly back into session later this year if the stadium funding plan didn’t pass. Missouri is competing to keep the teams with Kansas, which last year expanded a tax incentive program in the hopes of convincing one or both teams to relocate.

The leases for both teams’ Jackson County stadiums run through the end of the 2030 season.

Senators have also floated the idea of a special session to consider a $500 million construction package the House refused to pass that would have funded projects for health care, education and law enforcement across the state.

“You could possibly have a special session,” said state Sen. Nick Schroer, a Defiance Republican. “But what’s that going to look like? I hope my colleagues on both sides can continue moving forward. We showed that we could work together on the majority of these issues this year, both sides making concessions, and that’s how it should be. Unfortunately we hit a brick wall, but I’m hoping for the best once we do come back, whether it’s in a special or in January.”

But on Wednesday, as the legislative session was collapsing under the weight of the Senate PQ, Democrats promised a much more confrontational approach.

“Moving forward, we’re going to operate with an assumption that Republicans don’t respect their fellow senators, they don’t respect the voters, they don’t respect the process and they don’t respect the institution,” Webber said. “We didn’t pick this fight, but we’re not scared.”

This story was originally published by the Missouri Independent.

Government & Politics What’s Missouri’s next play to keep Chiefs, Royals after stadiums plan dies?

Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe put forward a plan to help fund stadiums for the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals, but the plan didn’t pass before the General Assembly’s annual session ended. The Kansas City Star

Even as Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe aggressively pushed a funding plan for the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals this week, he laid the groundwork for what would come next if he failed – a special session.

That scenario now appears accepted as likely among lawmakers and state officials after the Senate adjourned its regular session Wednesday without voting on the funding plan, which could finance up to half the cost of a new stadium or stadium upgrades for one or both teams.

Its success is far from guaranteed.

When Kehoe emerged from a closed-door gathering of House GOP lawmakers earlier in the week, he said past governors of both parties had been willing to call special sessions for major projects. It was a strong hint that he, too, would be willing to recall lawmakers to Jefferson City if he came up short.

“I think our economic development proposal on the west side of the state is that significant,” Kehoe said.

But 48 hours later, Republicans and Democrats are furious at each other, and bitter feelings exist between the House and Senate. The acrimony risks derailing a special session focused on stadiums, which Kehoe could call at any time but that some lawmakers expect will take place in June.

The Missouri Senate’s more collegial atmosphere this year, after pointed infighting in recent years, collapsed on Wednesday. The Republican majority broke Democratic filibusters to place a new abortion ban before voters and passed a bill repealing sick leave protections approved by voters in November.

Senators then immediately adjourned without any of the well-wishing speeches that often occur in the final minutes of the session.

“From this point forward, if I have anything to say, everything is going to be so hard around here, it’s gonna be very hard,” Senate Minority Leader Doug Beck, a St. Louis-area Democrat, said.

Beck and other Democrats signaled that a special session on stadiums will be a difficult task, at least in the Senate, because of anger over how Republicans acted. Filibusters are very rarely broken in the Senate, a chamber that prizes at-times lengthy deliberation; the last time senators voted to cut off debate was in 2020.

Kehoe’s plan marked the most ambitious effort to keep the Chiefs and Royals in Missouri since Jackson County voters in April 2024 rejected a stadiums sales tax. Kansas lawmakers have since approved a sweeping proposal to offer supercharged bonds to finance up to 70% of the cost of new stadiums for one or both teams.

The Missouri plan, which relies on bonds and tax credits that could pay for up to half the costs of upgrading or building new stadiums, would allow the teams to apply for the aid but the state would have to sign off on each project. Under the plan, the total amount of state funding will be capped at 30 years and cannot exceed 50% of the total project costs. The proposal would also require contributions from local governments.

Decades of academic research has consistently found that stadiums and arenas are not major drivers of economic development. But elected officials often embrace them, portraying stadiums as significant economic development projects.

Missouri lawmakers offered the stadiums proposal as an amendment to legislation that would have authorized Clay County to create a sports authority. The underlying bill also didn’t pass, but the Clay County provision appears to have passed on another bill on Thursday.

Clay County leaders saw the sports authority as a key step toward making the county a viable option for the Royals. The team has considered a North Kansas City stadium site.

Nathan Papes Springfield News-Leader file photo

Stadiums compete with other priorities

The stadiums proposal enjoys bipartisan support, as well as some bipartisan opposition. The House passed the measure 108-40 just hours after it was unveiled.

Still, some Kansas City Democrats have made clear that stadiums can’t be prioritized over “the will of the voters” – a reference to the Republican-led efforts to seek a new abortion ban after voters overturned the old one in November and the repeal of sick leave protections.

Senators of both parties are also angry that the House didn’t vote last week on a budget bill containing hundreds of millions for projects across the state. They included $48 million to help build a new mental health hospital in Kansas City. Lawmakers may seek a deal to fund at least some capital projects in exchange for support of stadiums legislation.

“I believe in the greater good,” Sen. Barbara Washington, a Kansas City Democrat, said. “And while the Chiefs do bring a significant economic impact, as well as the Royals, the greater economic good is to put a hospital down in the rural parts of our state, is to make sure that we have obstetrics care north of U.S. 36, to make sure that we get the $48 million that we still need to do the mental health hospital in Kansas City.”

“Those things are more important to me and to my colleagues than the Chiefs.”

Missouri state Sen. Barbara Washington, a Kansas City Democrat, speaks on the Missouri Senate floor in 2024. Harrison Sweazea Missouri Senate Communications

Peverill Squire, a University of Missouri political science professor who has long followed Missouri politics, said senators probably don’t want to come back and deal with the House again soon. Everybody will be happy to get out of Jefferson City, he predicted.

“I suspect there probably won’t be a lot of enthusiasm among state legislators to have a special session anytime soon,” Squire said.

Senate Republican leaders didn’t hold any news conferences after the end of session on Wednesday, breaking with tradition. Instead, GOP leadership sent out a statement that included no mention of stadiums.

Sen. Kurtis Gregory, a Marshall Republican who sponsored the underlying sports bill, said a special session is an option. “I don’t think that we want to let this opportunity pass us by,” he said.

Kehoe’s office hasn’t responded to requests for comment.

Becky Nace, a former Kansas City council member who led a successful campaign opposing the Jackson County stadiums sales tax last year, said she wasn’t surprised the General Assembly didn’t pass the plan. Nace said lawmakers hadn’t conducted due diligence on the proposal, which was rushed through the legislative process without public hearings.

For Nace, who wants both teams to remain at the Truman Sports Complex, the legislative proposal echoed the failed Jackson County plan. Once again, she contends, officials are pushing to authorize aid for the teams without details and commitments from the teams about the scope of any stadium projects and their location.

“Kind of a blank check just like the voters were asked to pass in April,” Nace said, referring to the Jackson County vote in April 2024.

An aerial view of Truman Sports Complex Star file photo

Kansas vs. Missouri stadium plans

The proposed program offers funding for stadium development by covering annual bond payments up to the amount a team generated in state tax revenue in the year prior to when it took effect. The program would dedicate funds for bond payments up to the amount of revenue “historically generated by the teams.”

The proposal would set a minimum project cost of $500 million to qualify and stadiums must have a seating capacity of more than 30,000. A new Royals stadium would cost more than $1 billion. A new Chiefs stadium could cost up to $3 billion. When the team brought forth a plan to renovate Arrowhead Stadium a year ago, the Chiefs projected that cost at $800 million.

The Missouri proposal isn’t as generous as the Kansas law, which would allow bonds to finance up to 70% of the cost of new stadiums, compared to 50% in Missouri. But Geoffrey Propheter, a professor at the University of Colorado-Denver who has studied sports and urban affairs, said Missouri possess a greater ability to offer local funding.

Jackson County already has a 3/8th-cent stadium sales tax, for instance. “It’s very unlikely you’d see Wyandotte or Kansas City, Kansas, being able to throw money into pot just because of how different the tax bases are,” Propheter said.

The clock is ticking on the Kansas law – for now. Top Kansas lawmakers must vote by June 30 to extend the state’s stadium financing program for another year, giving the Chiefs and Royals more time to negotiate an agreement with state officials.

Missouri supporters of the stadiums funding plan don’t want to take any chances.

“We need to compete with Kansas,” Rep. Chris Brown, a Kansas City Republican, said. “We need to compete now.”

This story was originally published May 15, 2025 at 2:55 PM.