Why the Chiefs and Royals couldn't persuade Kansas City voters to foot the bill for his or her stadiums

It gave the look of the proper time for Kansas City Chiefs leaders to ask local voters to spend some money on stadium renovations.

The team was riding high a giant Super Bowl win in February 2024, his third NFL championship within the last five years. Two other NFL franchises, the Buffalo Bills and Tennessee Titans, had received record-breaking tax money for brand spanking new stadiums previously two years. And voters in neighboring Oklahoma City recently agreed not less than $900 million in subsidies for a brand new NBA arena.

But the Chiefs and their partners, the MLB's Kansas City Royals, were in for a rude awakening.

On April 2, 2024, Jackson County voters firmly rejected a referendum to increase a neighborhood sales tax for 40 years to offer $2 billion in public funds to construct a brand new baseball stadium in downtown Kansas City and to fund major renovations to Arrowhead Stadium, home of the Chiefs.

The vote in Missouri took place a month later the collapse of an arena project that might have moved the Washington, D.C. basketball and hockey teams, the Wizards and Capitals, to Alexandria, Virginia.

Also proposed facilities in Las Vegas; Oakland, California; Tampa, Florida; And Chicago have all encountered serious obstacles, all stemming from taxpayers questioning why they ought to be forced to cover the expenses of personal corporations.

What gave the look of a flood of latest taxpayer-funded sports facilities across the country has became a trickle.

A bargain for the general public

While leagues and team owners all the time claim that stadiums and arenas revitalize cities and generate enormous economic returns, it's three many years of research by economists like me has proven the alternative.

A current survey An evaluation of over 130 academic studies shows that the direct economic advantages of stadiums fall far wanting the big public money spent on constructing them.

Even making an allowance for non-monetary advantages of sports teams, corresponding to quality of life and civic pride, the survey concluded that “the large subsidies typically provided for the construction of professional sports facilities are not justified as worthwhile public investments.”

Give voters the chance to have their say

So the popularity that stadiums represent a terrible public investment is nothing recent.

So why were efforts to dam a stadium in Kansas City successful while New York and Tennessee residents were saddled with billions in construction costs for brand spanking new stadiums?

Most importantly, Kansas City voters had a direct say in approving the project.

Contrast this with Buffalo's $850 million donation was negotiated in secret by the governor and fell on unsuspecting taxpayers just days before a final vote within the state parliament was scheduled.

Nashville A $1.3 billion stadium subsidy was approved by the mayor and city council, not by voters who could only express their displeasure by throwing the offending government officials out of office at the subsequent electionfar too late to stop the project.

It seems that handing over taxpayer money to billionaire owners is way less popular with odd residents than it’s with well-connected government officials.

An NFL owner attempting to ingratiate himself with local government officials can all the time launch a charm offensive, corresponding to inviting them to games within the owner's box. This strategy doesn't work while you're attempting to win over a complete electorate.

Owners also are inclined to overestimate what number of sports fans there actually are in a community. Even in a comparatively small market like Kansas City, it's lower than 1 in 30 residents of the metropolitan region are season ticket holders for the Chiefs. A big majority of the population doesn’t attend a single Royals game per 12 months typical season.

An even smaller portion of the population has access to VIP seating, but each Kansas City ownership groups identified how the brand new stadiums would expand these amenities.

Luxury boxes are excellent ways to extend team profits. Public mood? Not as much.

Threats to relocate remain unsuccessful

Team owners routinely use the tactic of threatening relocation to extort subsidies from cities and states. But such threats have tended to impress and encourage more resentment than fear Voter referendums are less prone to pass.

In the case of Kansas City, there may be a risk of relocation – half-heartedly suggested by Chiefs President Mark Donovan – was not taken seriously.

Kansas City is a superb NFL market with an especially dedicated fan base that any sensible owner could be reluctant to provide up. There can be television revenue within the NFL are divided equally amongst all teamsmeaning even a comparatively small team just like the Chiefs can afford to pay top dollar to maintain its best players like quarterback Patrick Mahomes and tight end – and Taylor Swift beau – Travis Kelce.

The Royals is likely to be a more likely candidate for a move with fewer championships and star power. But such a move would require finding one other city willing to do what Missouri voters were unwilling to do: provide huge subsidies for a brand new baseball stadium.

Such cities have proven elusive. The Oakland A's couldn't persuade anyone within the Bay Area to construct them a brand new ballpark and recently announced a move to Las Vegas just to seek out out Nevadans weren't necessarily willing to pay for it, either. The team could find yourself playing the subsequent three years in a minor league stadium in Sacramento, California, as he plans his next move.

Billionaire team owners have been trying for many years to persuade cities to divert public money to their private corporations. However, these subsidies primarily profit the owners higher sales and franchise valuationsnot the communities that pay for the stadiums.

With Jackson County handing team owners a powerful defeat, perhaps more Americans are finally heeding the words of former Minnesota Gov. Jesse “The Body” Ventura.

“Stadiums should be like libraries” he said during a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee in 2001. “If taxpayers build it, they should be able to use it for free.”