\n
![](\"https:\/\/fortune.com\/img-assets\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/GettyImages-1996273255.jpg?w=2048\")
<\/p>\n [ad_1]
\n<\/p>\n
Kansas is making a serious run at becoming the new home for the reigning Super Bowl champions<\/a> with legislators approving a plan Tuesday to lure<\/a> the Chiefs and Major League Baseball\u2019s Kansas City Royals away from Missouri.<\/p>\n Bipartisan legislative supermajorities OK\u2019d the measure to authorize state bonds to help finance new stadiums and practice facilities for both teams on the Kansas side of the metropolitan area of 2.3 million residents, which is split by the border with Missouri. Three Super Bowl victories in five years \u2014 and player Travis Kelce\u2019s romance with pop icon Taylor Swift \u2014 have made the Chiefs perhaps the area\u2019s most celebrated civic asset.<\/p>\n The plan from the Republican-controlled Legislature goes next to Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly. While she stopped short of promising to sign it, she said in a statement that \u201cKansas now has the opportunity to become a professional sports powerhouse.\u201d<\/p>\n Both the Chiefs and the Royals said they look forward to considering Kansas options. The lease on the Missouri complex with their side-by-side stadiums runs through January 2031, but both have said they already should have been planning for the future.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re excited about what happened here today,\u201d Korb Maxwell, an attorney for the Chiefs who lives on the Kansas side, said at the Statehouse after the bill cleared the Legislature. \u201cThis is incredibly real.\u201d<\/p>\n The approval capped a two-month push to capitalize on the refusal in April<\/a> by voters on the Missouri side to continue a local sales tax used to finance the upkeep of the teams\u2019 stadiums.<\/p>\n Backers of the plan brushed aside decades of research by economists concluding that government subsidies for professional sports stadiums are not worth the cost<\/a>. They also overcame criticism that lawmakers were moving too quickly.<\/p>\n A spokeswoman for Missouri Gov. Mike Parson did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment. But in Kansas City, Missouri, Mayor Quinton Lucas promised to \u201clay out a good offer\u201d to keep both teams in town.<\/p>\n \u201cToday was largely, in my opinion, about leverage,\u201d Lucas said. \u201cAnd the teams are in an exceptional leverage position.\u201d<\/p>\n Some Kansas officials reached the same conclusion.<\/p>\n \u201cI think the Chiefs and the Royals are using us,\u201d said state Rep. Susan Ruiz, a Kansas City-area Democrat.<\/p>\n The votes on the Kansas stadium-financing plan were 84-38<\/a> in the state House and 27-8<\/a> in the Senate. Lawmakers from across the state \u2014 even western Kansas, far from any new stadium \u2014 supported the measure.<\/p>\n It would allow state bonds to cover up to 70% of each new stadium, paying them off over 30 years with revenues from sports betting, state lottery ticket sales and new sales and alcohol taxes collected from shopping and entertainment districts around the new stadiums.<\/p>\n House Commerce Committee Chair Sean Tarwater, a Kansas City-area Republican, said the Chiefs still are likely to spend $500 million to $700 million in private funds on a new stadium.<\/p>\n \u201cThere are no blank checks,\u201d Tarwater told GOP colleagues during a briefing.<\/p>\n Legislators debated the plan during a one-day special session called by Kelly to have them consider reducing taxes after she vetoed three tax-cutting plans<\/a> before legislators adjourned their regular annual session May 1.<\/p>\n\nVoters and economists aren\u2019t sold <\/h2>\n
Tax cuts or stadium bills?<\/h2>\n