Kansas Steps Up Big in Bid to Lure Chiefs with Massive Stadium Proposal
The Kansas City Chiefs may soon find themselves at the heart of a high-stakes tug-of-war between two states, and Kansas is making it clear: they’re ready to play ball-and play big.
A newly proposed deal lays out an ambitious framework to bring the Super Bowl-winning franchise across the state line, anchored by a long-term stadium development plan with some serious financial backing. At the core of the proposal is a 30-year agreement, with an option to stretch it another 30 years, signaling Kansas’ intent to lock in the Chiefs for the long haul.
The Financial Playbook
Here’s how the numbers break down: Kansas would cover 65% of the stadium project costs through STAR bonds-a form of tax increment financing that uses future sales tax revenue to pay off development debt. On top of that, the state would kick in another 10% from its sports betting fund, earmarked specifically for ongoing maintenance, repairs, and operations. And to sweeten the pot even further, the entire development would be exempt from property taxes.
But the state isn’t just throwing money at the problem. The deal draws a clear line between what the Chiefs pay in rent and what the state is responsible for when it comes to upkeep.
The team’s base rent starts at $7 million annually, with built-in increases tied to inflation. That money won’t be going into Kansas’ general fund-it’s a separate revenue stream.
Meanwhile, the state is setting aside $17 million a year for what’s known as RMMO-repairs, maintenance, management, and operations. That’s the budget to keep the stadium in top condition over time.
A Regional Effort
To support the STAR bonds, Kansas is casting a wide net. The proposed STAR bond district would stretch across roughly 300 square miles, covering parts of Wyandotte and Johnson counties.
That includes not just Kansas City, Kansas, and Olathe, but also Edwardsville, Bonner Springs, Shawnee, and Lenexa. Sales tax revenue from all of these areas would help pay down the bonds.
This isn’t just a city-level push-it’s a regional effort, and Kansas is betting that the long-term economic boost from a new NFL stadium will more than justify the upfront investment.
A $6.3 Billion Commitment?
Still, the scale of the proposal is raising eyebrows. According to Geoffrey Propheter, a University of Colorado Denver professor who specializes in stadium financing, the public commitment could total around $6.3 billion over time when adjusted for inflation.
That’s a staggering figure, and one that puts Kansas’ bid in the same conversation as some of the biggest stadium projects in the country. Propheter specifically pointed to the Washington Commanders’ riverfront development project, which includes long-term commercial rents and is currently the largest of its kind in the U.S.
“Kansas is doing a really good job trying to beat the Commanders,” Propheter said.
Not a Done Deal-Yet
But before Chiefs fans start brushing up on Kansas geography, it’s important to note that this deal is still in the early stages. The term sheet gives the team an exit clause if the necessary land can’t be secured. And the real tipping point-the moment fans will know the move is official-comes when the team formally files relocation paperwork with the NFL.
Until then, this remains a high-level proposal with plenty of moving parts.
The Long Game: Risks and Rewards
Propheter also flagged a major concern that comes with tax increment financing districts like STAR bonds: they divert sales tax revenue that would otherwise go into the state’s general fund. That’s money Kansas currently uses to fund schools, public safety, health services, and more.
Kansas pulls in about $2.7 billion annually from its 6.5% statewide sales tax, which represents roughly a third of its general revenue. Redirecting a portion of that to pay off stadium debt could create budget pressure down the road.
“The biggest problem with these tax increment districts is that you’re diverting revenue, but you’re still paying for services,” Propheter said. “So you have to, in the long run, either raise taxes or cut services or some combination of both.”
It’s a classic economic gamble: build something big and flashy to drive demand and growth, but risk long-term fiscal strain if that demand doesn’t hold steady over decades.
As Propheter put it, “If you build this thing, everyone and their kids are going to want to spend the money to come see the shiny new palace. But you can’t sustain that demand for 30 years.”
What’s Next?
For now, Kansas has made its move. The proposal is bold, detailed, and clearly designed to make the Chiefs think hard about their future.
Whether it’s enough to pull the franchise across the state line remains to be seen-but one thing’s certain: this is no half-hearted pitch. Kansas is going all-in.