Quote:
Originally Posted by tredadda
Do the Chiefs own the stadium? Nope, the city/county does. They can absolutely do whatever they want with the stadium the 355/356 days a year that the Chiefs are not playing there.
I won’t say things that gets this pushed to DC but there are plenty of things taxpayers have to pay for even if they don’t enjoy what their taxes fund.
Lastly it’s not even a new tax but one that is already in place. It would have just been an extension of that. How many people have noticed that difference week in and week out over the years? How many will see any difference if it goes away?
People tend to take pride in where they are from/currently live and having sports teams contributes to that. This is especially true of places that aren’t populated by transients whose loyalty is elsewhere.
|
You are incorrect. The stadium tax extension would not have paid for the royals downtown stadium. If the extension passed the royals would have put their hands into our money a second time.
There are also residents that don't take pride in having a sports team. There are even.... gasp.. cities without pro teams that still have a lot of pride. Can you even imagine?
Maybe KC just isn't able to afford the luxury of supporting two sports teams anymore? Maybe this is better left to cities with better public transportation and more tourism dollars because of mountains or oceans or massive casinos? Why would someone from out of state choose KC over Vegas, Colorado, or the Pacific ocean? So they can eat BBQ in an airport and a 45 minute drive in a rental car? Have you seen the cost of our above average hotels lately? The prices are not that far off from some hotel rooms in Manhattan NY.