Voters reject sales tax to fund new stadiums for Chiefs and Royals

https://apnews.com/article/chiefs-royals-kansas-city-stadiums-e9605296b85e91699441e4ba10e83212

Jackson County voters rejected a proposed increase in sales tax to fund new stadiums and/or renovations to their respective stadiums. In a time where teams have the money to pay a starting QB $50 million/year, I don't think they need taxpayer money to build their playgrounds.

Next will come the threats of moving the teams.

No public money should fund sports stadiums. One of the biggest grifts there is.

In my opinion, there is a big difference between building a stadium, in a town that wants to attract a major league team an NFL team an NBA team,, vs raising taxes to give these owners a new stadium.  

Attracting teams that you’ve never had, can be good for restaurants, hotels, fast food tollbooth, merchandise, parking fees, everything that can benefit a community financially, and by increasing job growth  

Building a new stadium for teams that are already there?  No.

Pro-sports teams are big business.

Wringing the taxpayers dry to build stadiums is just another part of their grifting.

What Cameron said.

DWags wrote:In my opinion, there is a big difference between building a stadium, in a town that wants to attract a major league team an NFL team an NBA team,, vs raising taxes to give these owners a new stadium.  

Attracting teams that you’ve never had, can be good for restaurants, hotels, fast food tollbooth, merchandise, parking fees, everything that can benefit a community financially, and by increasing job growth  

Building a new stadium for teams that are already there?  No.

I'm not so sure that professional sports teams are the economic boon to a town that some try to argue it is.

On a more local level, Corktown in Detroit was a dump when the Tigers were at Michigan and Trumball. In the 25 years since the Tigers left it has gone from dump to a cool neighborhood.

Zurn wrote:

DWags wrote:In my opinion, there is a big difference between building a stadium, in a town that wants to attract a major league team an NFL team an NBA team,, vs raising taxes to give these owners a new stadium.  

Attracting teams that you’ve never had, can be good for restaurants, hotels, fast food tollbooth, merchandise, parking fees, everything that can benefit a community financially, and by increasing job growth  

Building a new stadium for teams that are already there?  No.

I'm not so sure that professional sports teams are the economic boon to a town that some try to argue it is.

On a more local level, Corktown in Detroit was a dump when the Tigers were at Michigan and Trumball. In the 25 years since the Tigers left it has gone from dump to a cool neighborhood.

I don’t think you can just take Corktown and correlate it with the tigers. Detroit has come back in many areas. Including Greek town.

I also don’t think, even if you are trying to attract a major league team, that you should just be able to raise taxes without a citywide vote.

It should be, at best, a cheap loan... with a city ownership stake built in to the contract like Green Bay.

Forbes says the Royals are worth $1.2 billion, Chiefs $4.3 billion. Fuck those owners right in the pooper.

Good for them!

The Browns are doing the same thing that the Bears did, and are pretending to be interested in moving outside the city proper to get a new stadium. Judging by the comments sections I've been following, Cleveland area voters are ready and willing to be bent over the barrel to either pay for a new stadium, or renovate the current one. Those sweet summer children. They haven't had the hard luck of being grifted by billionaires yet with the promise of a new "arena district" that will bring traffic and jobs. Only way for them to learn is apparently the hard way.

CaptainSlow33 wrote:Good for them!

The Browns are doing the same thing that the Bears did, and are pretending to be interested in moving outside the city proper to get a new stadium. Judging by the comments sections I've been following, Cleveland area voters are ready and willing to be bent over the barrel to either pay for a new stadium, or renovate the current one. Those sweet summer children. They haven't had the hard luck of being grifted by billionaires yet with the promise of a new "arena district" that will bring traffic and jobs. Only way for them to learn is apparently the hard way.

Cleveland right now:

Cameron wrote:

CaptainSlow33 wrote:Good for them!

The Browns are doing the same thing that the Bears did, and are pretending to be interested in moving outside the city proper to get a new stadium. Judging by the comments sections I've been following, Cleveland area voters are ready and willing to be bent over the barrel to either pay for a new stadium, or renovate the current one. Those sweet summer children. They haven't had the hard luck of being grifted by billionaires yet with the promise of a new "arena district" that will bring traffic and jobs. Only way for them to learn is apparently the hard way.

Cleveland right now: