Advertisement

No Maserati for us? Poll says KC would pass on downtown baseball even if Royals paid

Since we keep mentioning it, we’re pretty sure you remember when mayoral candidate Quinton Lucas said he saw the prospect of downtown baseball in Kansas City the same way he saw the prospect of a nice new Maserati: “It’d be cool to have, but I can’t afford it.”

A new poll claims that Kansas Citians wouldn’t take a Maserati even if the dealership left it gift-wrapped in the driveway.

The survey, conducted by Remington Research Group, found that Republicans, Democrats and independents, men and women, both north and south of the river, don’t think a downtown stadium is a good idea.

Supposedly — and this part is a surprise — that would hold true even if the Royals paid 100% of the cost of a new stadium. Roughly 49% of those surveyed would still oppose a privately financed ballpark downtown, the poll shows, while just 37% would support the idea. The gap is outside the survey’s margin of error.

Support for downtown baseball drops dramatically when taxpayers become involved. Just 20% of those polled would support a downtown stadium if the city kicked in half of the project’s cost, while 66% would oppose the idea.

A mere 12% would support a downtown stadium if taxpayers paid 75% of the cost. That would drop to 10% support if the public bore the full cost of the ballpark.

Royals owner John Sherman, and public officials, will have to change some minds if downtown baseball is to become a reality.

Why might the public oppose downtown baseball even if the Royals paid for it? Convenience, for one thing. Crowded downtown streets and difficult parking are not appealing. Pregame tailgates are more popular.

“Try going to a ballgame in downtown Denver,” one resident emailed The Star Editorial Board. “Arrive in the area plenty early to cruise the cramped parking lots randomly scattered about like storm-tossed refuse. … l like Royals games out at Kauffman Stadium.”

“People love going to Kauffman Stadium,” another emailer told us. “It’s always touted as one of the prettiest stadiums in the country. Easy parking too.”

Tradition plays a role. “They like Kauffman Stadium,” said one political consultant who has seen the poll results. “They like the history.”

Those concerns might be addressed. But wide disapproval margins for any taxpayer support for a stadium would be much more difficult to overcome.

The survey involved only Kansas City residents because they would likely be the primary source for public stadium funding. Jackson Countians have supported the Truman Sports Complex, but that’s because the current stadiums are convenient to Lee’s Summit and Independence.

Could Kansas City afford to support a downtown stadium on its own? A quarter-cent sales tax would raise about $600 million over 30 years, probably enough to provide funds for a 50-50 stadium downtown.

But Kansas City’s sales taxes are already notoriously high, approaching 10 cents on the dollar in most places. Other public improvements — sidewalks, sewers, roads — are already dinging taxpayers. Huge subsidies for hotels and office buildings are costly.

Chiefs would expect what Royals get, too

Passing a stadium sales tax would be hard under any circumstances.

And what about the Chiefs? We’re told the team has informed local officials they’ll expect parity with the Royals, which would mean finding another $600 million or so. Jackson Countians might be asked to pay that — but remember, part of Kansas City is in Jackson County. Some city taxes would have to go even higher.

The details are far from certain, of course. Kansas Citians (and everyone else, including us) should withhold judgment until those details are known. The two franchises are highly important, and highly popular. This discussion is inevitable.

But the teams and public officials must answer several concerns. What is the benefit of new stadiums to non-fans? Could the money be better spent elsewhere? What can surrounding counties do to help?

Can users pay the cost? The leagues? Would disadvantaged neighborhoods benefit? What would happen to the current complex if the Royals moved?

Honesty and transparency are essential. This can’t be a cooked-up, backroom deal presented as a take-it-or-leave-it proposition. There is time, although not a lot: One scenario suggests a vote on Royals funding as early as 2024. That will make stadium funding a key issue in the 2023 Kansas City Council elections.

Maserati, yes or no, and at what cost?