Kansas prepares to extend deadline for Chiefs, Royals to claim incentive for stadium construction
The Kansas City Chiefs asked leadership of the Kansas Legislature to extend a June 30 deadline for acceptance of bonds that would finance up to 70% of construction a new professional sports stadium in Kansas. Senate President Ty Masterson, a Republican, said the Legislative Coordinating Council will take up the request in July ().
TOPEKA, Kansas — The president of the Kansas senate said Thursday a meeting with bipartisan legislative leadership would be called July 7 to extend the deadline for the Kansas City Chiefs or Kansas City Royals to accept an offer of financial support for construction of professional sports stadiums in Kansas.
Senate President Ty Masterson said the Republican-dominated Legislative Coordinating Council, which conducts state business when the Legislature isn't in session, would consider an extension of the one-year STAR bond deadline enacted in July 2024. Masterson didn't indicate how lengthy the extension could be.
Masterson said Mark Donovan, president of the Chiefs, asked Kansas officials to alter the deadline 'in light of substantial progress the Chiefs have made in discussions' with the Kansas Department of Commerce on an NFL development on the Kansas side of the border with Missouri.
Those discussions have included building of a stadium, headquarters, practice facility and related business developments, Donovan said.
'The letter from Mark Donovan indicates that the drive to bring this historic project to Kansas is moving down the field,' Masterson said. 'Now that we are in the red zone, this extension will provide stakeholders sufficient time to ensure the ball crosses the goal line.'
Missouri or Kansas? Business leaders don't care as long as Chiefs and Royals stay near KC
Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly signed a bill last year authorizing issuance of bonds that would cover up to 70% of stadium construction, but the law set the deadline for making a deal at June 30, 2025.
Last month, Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe signed legislation that would finance up to 50% of the cost to renovate or build new stadiums for the Royals and Chiefs. Missouri's commitment of tax revenue would be capped at $1.5 billion.
The NFL and MLB franchises play at facilities in Kansas City, Missouri, that were built in the early 1970s. Owners of the teams have encouraged formation of public funding packages that would support replacement of those stadiums. Debate about the future of both franchises has rekindled the economic border war between Missouri and Kansas.
The Legislative Coordinating Council would take up the measure altering the deadline at 2 p.m. July 7 in Topeka.
'The complexity and scale of the project, and the importance of crafting a structure that works for all stakeholders, make it clear that more time is needed to bring the effort to full fruition,' Donovan said in a letter to Masterson.
He said the Chiefs had engaged in multiple rounds of dialogue about stadium proposals with the state Department of Commerce. The Chiefs hadn't received a response to the franchise's latest proposal in six weeks, he said.
'Extending the secretary's authority will allow that process to continue productively and will preserve Kansas' ability to secure the most significant economic development initiative in its history,' Donovan's letter said.
This story originally appeared in the Kansas Reflector, a States Newsroom affiliate.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
'We Hope So': Trump On MEGABILL Meeting July 4 Deadline
President Trump hosted a 'One Big, Beautiful Event' Thursday afternoon from the White House as the GOP "Megabill" full of his domestic priorities makes its way through Congress. Republican leaders have voiced optimism they can get the legislation to Trump's desk by July 4 — but that timeline has faced some road bumps due to internal divisions over certain spending cuts and tax provisions. The Senate parliamentarian has also rejected many of the House-passed measures. The president has pressured GOP holdouts to support the bill, even if it means pushing into the lawmakers' recess. Thursday's event has been billed as his last-ditch effort to win them over.
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Supreme Court meets Friday to decide 6 remaining cases, including birthright citizenship
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is meeting Friday to decide the final six cases of its term, including President Donald Trump's bid to enforce his executive order denying birthright citizenship to U.S.-born children of parents who are in the country illegally. The justices take the bench at 10 a.m. for their last public session until the start of their new term on Oct. 6. The birthright citizenship order has been blocked nationwide by three lower courts. The Trump administration made an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court to narrow the court orders that have prevented the citizenship changes from taking effect anywhere in the U.S. The issue before the justices is whether to limit the authority of judges to issue nationwide injunctions, which have plagued both Republican and Democratic administrations in the past 10 years. These nationwide court orders have emerged as an important check on Trump's efforts and a source of mounting frustration to the Republican president and his allies. Decisions also are expected in several other important cases. The court seemed likely during arguments in April to side with Maryland parents in a religious rights case over LGBTQ storybooks in public schools. Parents in the Montgomery County school system, in suburban Washington, want to be able to pull their children out of lessons that use the storybooks, which the county added to the curriculum to better reflect the district's diversity. The school system at one point allowed parents to remove their children from those lessons, but then reversed course because it found the opt-out policy to be disruptive. Sex education is the only area of instruction with an opt-out provision in the county's schools. The justices also are weighing a three-year battle over congressional districts in Louisiana that is making its second trip to the Supreme Court. Before the court now is a map that created a second Black majority congressional district among Louisiana's six seats in the House of Representatives. The district elected a Black Democrat in 2024. Lower courts have struck down two Louisiana congressional maps since 2022 and the justices are considering whether to send state lawmakers back to the map-drawing board for a third time. The case involves the interplay between race and politics in drawing political boundaries in front of a conservative-led court that has been skeptical of considerations of race in public life. At arguments in March, several of the court's conservative justices suggested they could vote to throw out the map and make it harder, if not impossible, to bring redistricting lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act . Free speech rights are at the center of a case over a Texas law aimed at blocking kids from seeing online pornography. Texas is among more than a dozen states with age verification laws. The states argue the laws are necessary as smartphones have made access to online porn, including hardcore obscene material, almost instantaneous. The question for the court is whether the measure infringes on the constitutional rights of adults as well. The Free Speech Coalition, an adult-entertainment industry trade group, agrees that children shouldn't be seeing pornography. But it says the Texas law is written too broadly and wrongly affects adults by requiring them to submit personal identifying information online that is vulnerable to hacking or tracking. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Boston Globe
2 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Supreme Court meets Friday to decide 6 remaining cases, including birthright citizenship
The issue before the justices is whether to limit the authority of judges to issue nationwide injunctions, which have plagued both Republican and Democratic administrations in the past 10 years. Advertisement These nationwide court orders have emerged as an important check on Trump's efforts and a source of mounting frustration to the Republican president and his allies. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Decisions also are expected in several other important cases. The court seemed likely during arguments in April to side with Maryland parents in a religious rights case over LGBTQ storybooks in public schools. Parents in the Montgomery County school system, in suburban Washington, want to be able to pull their children out of lessons that use the storybooks, which the county added to the curriculum to better reflect the district's diversity. The school system at one point allowed parents to remove their children from those lessons, but then reversed course because it found the opt-out policy to be disruptive. Sex education is the only area of instruction with an opt-out provision in the county's schools. Advertisement The justices also are weighing a three-year battle over congressional districts in Louisiana that is making its second trip to the Supreme Court. Before the court now is a map that created a second Black majority congressional district among Louisiana's six seats in the House of Representatives. The district elected a Black Democrat in 2024. Lower courts have struck down two Louisiana congressional maps since 2022 and the justices are considering whether to send state lawmakers back to the map-drawing board for a third time. The case involves the interplay between race and politics in drawing political boundaries in front of a conservative-led court that has been skeptical of considerations of race in public life. At arguments in March, several of the court's conservative justices suggested they could vote to throw out the map and make it harder, if not impossible, to bring redistricting lawsuits under the Voting Rights Act. Free speech rights are at the center of a case over a Texas law aimed at blocking kids from seeing online pornography. Texas is among more than a dozen states with age verification laws. The states argue the laws are necessary as smartphones have made access to online porn, including hardcore obscene material, almost instantaneous. The question for the court is whether the measure infringes on the constitutional rights of adults as well. The Free Speech Coalition, an adult-entertainment industry trade group, agrees that children shouldn't be seeing pornography. But it says the Texas law is written too broadly and wrongly affects adults by requiring them to submit personal identifying information online that is vulnerable to hacking or tracking. Advertisement
