The Unified Government Board of Commissioners voted 7-3 Thursday evening to pledge local sales taxes toward a new Kansas City Chiefs stadium, clearing a crucial hurdle for the $4 billion sports complex project despite lingering concerns about costs to Wyandotte County taxpayers.

The ordinance, added to the agenda just days before the meeting, commits the county to pledging local sales and transient guest taxes within a 235-acre project area near 118th Street and State Avenue. The pledge is estimated to be worth between $350 million and $450 million over 25 years.

Commissioners Melissa Bynum, Andrew Kump, Jermaine Howard, Bill Burns, Christian Ramirez, Evelyn Hill, and Carlos Pacheco voted in favor. Commissioners Phil Lopez, Chuck Stites, and Andrew Davis voted against, with Davis stating as he voted, “I would like to have more information.”

The vote came after a lengthy presentation by attorney Todd LaSala of Stinson LLP, who addressed dozens of questions raised at a public hearing held two days earlier. The presentation included financial projections showing a potential net benefit of $92 million to the county, though LaSala repeatedly cautioned that all figures were “educated guesses” about the future.

Financial projections paint optimistic picture

LaSala presented analysis from veteran cost-benefit consultant Steve Robb of Municipal Consulting LLC showing the project could generate approximately $445 million in tax benefits to the Unified Government over 25 years, including unpledged sales tax ($275 million), transient guest tax ($56 million), and property taxes from the entertainment district ($32 million). Other local taxing jurisdictions such as schools and libraries could also see a benefit of around $43 million.

However, those benefits would be offset by an estimated $275 million in infrastructure costs for roads, intersections, stormwater systems, and sewers, plus $78 million in public safety and other costs, leaving a projected net surplus of $92 million.

LaSala told commissioners he had instructed Robb to use conservative assumptions throughout the analysis.

A key uncertainty is how much of the infrastructure cost will be covered by STAR bonds issued by the state. LaSala said he was “certain there will be negotiation” about infrastructure funding but couldn’t guarantee how much would ultimately be paid by the bonds versus local taxpayers.

“The thing I feel very confident about is that some of that 275 [million dollars] that we’re forecasting, some of it should be [covered],” LaSala said. “But this is the problem with the process, right? And having the pledge before you know the contract. I don’t definitively know.”

State sweetens deal with bridge funding

The state of Kansas has committed approximately millions of dollars for bridge repairs as part of the package, a sore spot with many local bridges closed. The deal includes $135 million for the Central Avenue Bridge, $1.2 million for the Kansas Avenue Bridge, $2 million for the Union Pacific Bridge, and $1.5 million for busing.

Dissenting commissioners express concerns

Commissioner Andrew Davis, who voted no, expressed frustration with the compressed timeline and lack of definitive commitments on infrastructure funding.

“This process is very fast,” Davis said. “Yet this project is so large, and it would be different if we weren’t talking about something of this magnitude.”

Davis pressed LaSala on whether there were any guarantees that STAR bond revenue would cover infrastructure costs in Wyandotte County. LaSala acknowledged the uncertainty: “If your question is do I have anything definitive? Are there contracts, has all that been worked out? Answer is definitely no.”

Davis said he appreciated the candor but added, “That’s what gives me quite a bit of pause here.”

Commissioner Phil Lopez, who also voted no, questioned whether the project represented genuinely new economic activity or merely a shift of existing activity. “Would you say this is more of a shift of economic activity rather than new activity?” Lopez asked, later inquiring, “What happens if the revenue projections are missed?”

Vote to keep “a seat at the table”

Commissioners who voted yes argued the ordinance was necessary to maintain leverage in negotiations and protect the county’s interests in a project that would likely proceed with or without their blessing.

Commissioner Carlos Pacheco characterized the vote as “more of a strategic play on our part,” saying the ordinance with its protective conditions gives the county control it wouldn’t otherwise have.

“This is the one opportunity we’ve given ourselves with some things baked in that protect our community that we wouldn’t have otherwise had,” Pacheco said. He noted that without the ordinance, the state has statutory authority to proceed independently: “It’s written down that they have the opportunity to do things without us if we don’t pass this ordinance.”

The ordinance includes several conditions to protect Wyandotte County’s interests, including:

• The district boundaries within KCK must match the 235-acre project area unless the UG agrees to expansion
• The UG must approve portions of contracts that directly affect the county
• The UG gets a seat on the five-member committee distributing community improvement funds
• Bonds must be issued by Dec. 31, 2031

Commissioner Melissa Bynum reflected on similar decisions made by Jackson County officials 50 years ago when they built the Truman Sports Complex. “That had to have been a major leap of faith,” Bynum said, comparing that era’s uncertainty to the current situation.

Bynum also noted she received 527 emails about the project, with “the vast majority of those in favor,” though she acknowledged not being able to verify all the senders.

Northeast commissioner voices concerns about equity

Commissioner Jermaine Howard, who represents District 1 in the northeast part of the county, delivered pointed remarks before voting yes, questioning why state bridge funding commitments focused on Central Avenue, Kansas Avenue, and Union Pacific bridges rather than his long-disinvested district.

“How did we come to the conclusion that this was what the county needed currently?” Howard asked, noting that the northeast has been disinvested in “longer than the Central Avenue Bridge.”

Despite his concerns about equity, Howard said he voted yes to ensure his district would have “a seat at the table” in negotiating community benefits.

“We have an opportunity here to negotiate what that looks like for our community, not their community,” Howard said. “We have an opportunity to stand flatfoot and say, ‘Hey, if you are not willing to deliver on this, then we have no deal,’ and we have leverage to do that.”

Howard emphasized that while “on paper it looks like” District 1 was left out, the vote creates an opportunity for the northeast. “It’s just an opportunity for us now to say what that looks like rather than them making the decision on where money should go,” he said.

Unusual process raises questions

LaSala acknowledged the process has been “very strange” and “very unique” compared to typical STAR bond projects, largely due to 2024 amendments to Kansas statute designed specifically for stadium deals.

Unlike traditional economic development projects, commissioners had just 60 days to decide whether to pledge local taxes, a deadline that expires Feb. 20. The STAR bond district boundaries haven’t been finalized, and contracts detailing stadium operations, maintenance, and demolition haven’t been negotiated.

When Commissioner Pacheco asked what would happen if the commission voted no, LaSala painted a stark picture of the potential consequences.

“It sends a dismissive message to the Kansas City Chiefs who want to choose Wyandotte County as their home,” LaSala said. He noted that under the statute, “the state has the power to draw the boundaries of the district anywhere they want and probably would, and could definitely proceed without us and without this community.”

LaSala also suggested that agreements Mayor Christal Watson had negotiated about bridge funding could be at risk. “I think that we’re talking about those bridges because the Kansas City Chiefs are coming to your community and they need people to get here,” he said. “Do we lose that without a yes vote tonight? Maybe.”

Mayor urges community trust

In an emotional closing statement after the vote, Watson urged residents to trust the commission’s decision and remain optimistic about the county’s future.

“This was not easy to make tonight. It was not,” Watson said. “But we do believe for those in the majority, that it was in the best interest of our community.”

Watson drew parallels to the development of the Legends shopping district, which she said was initially viewed skeptically but has made the county a tourist destination. “We have been a community that’s made some big long shots,” she said. “Let’s continue to be the community I know we can be because we have that potential.”

The ordinance also approved changes requested by the state to clarify that UG approval rights over definitive documents would be limited to portions directly affecting Wyandotte County, not aspects involving other communities like the Chiefs’ planned practice facility in Olathe.

With the local pledge now secured, attention turns to negotiations over community benefits, infrastructure funding, and the myriad contract details that remain unresolved. The stadium is expected to open in 2031, with bond issuance anticipated in 2030.