Home Page - Table of Contents - Feedback
Return to Articles Index
The Kansas City Star, April 25, 2004
by Lynn Horsely
Kansas City Councilman John Fairfield: We are at a watershed moment. A new stadium downtown would add to the momentum that has begun bringing jobs, visitors and residents back to Kansas City's core. I believe that the public funds that have been proposed for Kauffman Stadium, if used as part of a funding package to build a new stadium downtown, would leverage significant additional private investment and create many additional jobs. If we do not build a new stadium downtown now, it may be 20 years before we can make this happen.
Q: How much will it cost and how will the city pay for it? If you don't know, how can you say this is a good idea for Kansas City?
A: I do not know the exact cost of a downtown stadium, since that would depend on variables such as the precise location, land acquisition cost, and the Royals' needs. It is generally thought that such a downtown stadium would be in the $300 to $350 million range. Since the Bistate II proposal would generate about $180 million for a baseball stadium, that would leave a gap of $120 to $170 million to get a new, state-of-the-art stadium downtown, which would not only generate more revenue for the Royals but create significant additional downtown development. I believe there are a number of ways to finance this gap, and we are exploring those alternatives. There should at least be an open public discussion regarding how we want to invest public tax dollars, and the best location to make that investment.
Q: How do you respond to critics who say that Kauffman Stadium is popular, and that building a new downtown stadium would cost far more than the $180 million that would be spent under the Bistate II plan to refurbish Kauffman?
A: Many of us have fond memories of games at the “K,” but the fact remains, it is one of the oldest stadiums in the league, and it needs a major renovation. Spending the money to fix the “K” will not change the fact that its location does not create any synergies for additional private investment or the creation of new jobs. Virtually every other city that has built a new stadium, built it downtown, recognizing that their public funds would leverage significant new private investment and create new jobs. Since Kansas City is home to several internationally renowned sports architecture firms, it is ludicrous to think we cannot create a new downtown stadium as wonderful and popular as Kauffman.
Q: Mayor Kay Barnes says the top priority should instead be a downtown arena. What's your response? Has the mayor chastised you for taking a rival position?
A: I agree with them mayor that a new, downtown arena is a very high priority, and I have supported that effort; however, I do not think that precludes a serious public discussion about the benefits of concentrating our major public investments, like a baseball stadium, downtown. The mayor has not “chastised” me for my position, because our positions are not in opposition.
Q: Do you worry that your position might detract from support for a new bistate tax, which would also provide money for Arrowhead Stadium, a new Performing Arts Center, and other worthy projects?
A: No, to the contrary, open discussion is healthy in a democratic society and I think my proposal would strengthen the bistate proposal. I have been very supportive of the Performing Arts Center, arts, and Arrowhead renovations. However, if the gap financing for the downtown baseball stadium were found and approved, then those who support a downtown baseball stadium would have renewed energy for the Bistate campaign which also would benefit Arrowhead Stadium and the arts. I believe there are lots of voters out there who want the option to use the bistate money for a new downtown stadium if the gap financing can be found. If not, then we can rehabilitate Kauffman Stadium as proposed. I want downtown to be an option, not a mandate.
Home Page - Table of Contents - Feedback
B A L L P A R K T O U R . C O M