Connect with us

Politics

Kansas OKs tax bill to lure Chiefs, Royals away from Missouri

Published

on

[ad_1]


TOPEKA, Kansas — The Kansas City Royals and Chiefs could receive hundreds of millions of dollars in sales tax revenue to move from Missouri and build new stadiums across the state line under legislation passed Tuesday by Kansas lawmakers.The House voted 84-38 and the Senate voted 27-8 to approve legislation that would expand a state incentive program in an attempt to lure one or both teams from Kansas City.The bill now heads to Gov. Laura Kelly, a Democrat, who said in a statement following the Senate vote that the effort to bring the teams to Kansas “shows we’re all-in on keeping our beloved teams in the Kansas City metro.”“Kansas now has the opportunity to become a professional sports powerhouse with the Chiefs and Royals potentially joining Sporting KC as major league attractions, all with robust, revenue-generating entertainment districts surrounding them providing new jobs, new visitors and new revenues that boost the Kansas economy,” Kelly said.Neither team has promised to move to Kansas, though both actively lobbied for the legislation’s passage. The Chiefs said in a statement that the team appreciated Kansas leaders reaching out for input on the bill.“We look forward to exploring the options this legislation may provide,” the statement said.The Royals said the team was grateful to the legislature for its vote.“The Kansas City Royals look forward to additional conversations as we evaluate where we will play baseball in the future,” the team said. “We will always prioritize the best interests of our fans, associates and taxpayers in this process.”State Rep. Sean Tarwater, a Republican from Stilwell, said during debate in the House that Missouri had a history of losing professional sports teams and implored fellow House members to pass the legislation.“I ask you today, do you really want to put that type of an economic generation in the hands of the state of Missouri?” Tarwater said just before the vote.Passage of the bill represents a monumental step in Kansas lawmakers’ attempts to court the teams. Both teams have signaled a willingness to move from their current stadiums at the Truman Sports Complex in Kansas City, Missouri.While neither team has announced a proposed site for a Kansas stadium, legislators speculated it could land in Wyandotte County near the Sporting KC soccer stadium, NASCAR track and outlet shops.“We have the history of building amazing projects that have brought in retail commerce, restaurants, hotels and have improved an area that was largely just a field and turned it into a tax-generating machine for our state,” said state Sen. J.R. Claeys, a Salina Republican.The legislation, he said, would put Kansas in a “very good position to keep the Kansas City Chiefs and the Kansas City Royals in the Kansas City metro area.”The bill, which was not voted on by any legislative committee, would expand the state’s Sales Tax and Revenue (STAR) Bond program, which is meant to help finance tourism and entertainment districts to help pay for a professional football or baseball stadium of at least $1 billion.A developer building a stadium under the program would be eligible to finance up to 70% of the project cost by issuing bonds and repaying them with the increased sales tax collections from the stadium site. The expansion would have initially allowed up to 75% of project costs but was tweaked before introduction. Debt on a stadium constructed under the expansion wouldn’t have to be repaid for 30 years instead of the normal 20.The project could also receive a boost from liquor taxes generated in the STAR Bond district and revenues from a fund Kansas created when it legalized sports betting.During House debate, state Rep. Paul Waggoner, a Hutchinson Republican, argued subsidized stadiums never generate the economic activity that they promise. He was alarmed by what he called “minimal transparency” in the deal-making process laid out in the legislation.The bill says any agreement between the state and a team would be confidential until after it has been executed.Waggoner called the legislation “bad public policy.”“This is not your mother’s STAR Bonds,” Waggoner said. “This is a jacked up super-sized version of STAR Bonds.”The bill limits the eligibility to National Football League or Major League Baseball teams currently near Kansas. The financing mechanism could be used for both stadiums and training facilities.Both teams have pressed lawmakers in recent weeks to pass the bill with representatives from the Royals hosting dinner for Democratic lawmakers at a steakhouse Monday night and the Chiefs throwing a lunchtime block party Tuesday steps from the Capitol.Earlier this month, a nonprofit called Scoop and Score Inc. launched to advocate for a Kansas stadium deal. The organization, which does not have to disclose its donors, hired 30 lobbyists to advocate for the STAR Bond expansion legislation.In a statement, former Kansas House Speaker Ron Ryckman Jr., a lobbyist for Scoop and Score and the Chiefs, said the Legislature “stepped up in a big way, paving the path to make sure the Chiefs stay right where they belong — in Kansas City with their loyal fans.”“The votes show overwhelming bipartisan support because Kansas lawmakers know what the Chiefs mean to us and how big of an economic opportunity this is for Kansas,” Ryckman said.Several lawmakers expressed skepticism about STAR Bonds or the deal in front of them but voted for it anyway.State Rep. Jason Probst, a Democrat from Hutchinson, said the idea disgusts him and lamented that the legislature does not move as swiftly to pass bills on issues including homelessness, hunger or childhood poverty. But he still voted for the bill.“So I’m going to hold my nose and probably support this,” he said, “but not without protesting the fact that we get sent here to do things for people, and we never move with this sort of urgency or with this sort of passion or the energy that we have around this.”In a meeting of House Democrats before the vote, Probst said he thought the Chiefs were using Kansas to “get Missouri worked up” so the state would “sweeten the pot” and offer the team more incentives to stay put.Probst said he was bothered that the Chiefs were making an emotional appeal, invoking sports heroes, while being thin on details. Still, he said, it would be “catastrophic” if the Chiefs left the Kansas City metro area.“I do not like this. It feels gross,” Probst said. “This whole show that’s going on feels disgusting to me. And it’s still the right thing to do. That’s how I see it.”State Rep. Stephanie Sawyer Clayton, an Overland Park Democrat, said during that meeting that she was struggling with the proposal “because I don’t like misogynistic dude bro culture,” because the family that owns the Chiefs supported the anti-abortion constitutional amendment that Kansas voters rejected in 2022. She said she also doesn’t like Ryckman.But, she said, her decision to support the bill was cemented when she saw testimony from the governor’s office that suggested the governor planned to sign the bill if passed.Clayton said it would “warm the cockles of my cold, dead feminist heart” to see Kelly get credit for moving the teams to Missouri “and not the dude bros who have been working on this.”“That is why I’m a ‘yes,’” Clayton said. “I want a woman getting credit for sports things. So I’m doing it out of spite, frankly.”Across the rotunda, state Sen. Molly Baumgardner, a Republican from Louisburg, argued STAR Bonds had generally not created anything new but rather subsidized development that likely would have occurred anyway.“I understand the excitement behind the prospect,” she said. “It is like it’s Christmas Eve and there’s visions of sugar plums, only its royal blue and crimson and gold in this case.”This story was originally published by The Missouri Independent, part of the States Newsroom.

[ad_2]

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Poll: Support for Missouri abortion rights amendment growing

Published

on

[ad_1]


A proposed constitutional amendment legalizing abortion in Missouri received support from more than half of respondents in a new poll from St. Louis University and YouGov.That’s a boost from a poll earlier this year, which could mean what’s known as Amendment 3 is in a solid position to pass in November.SLU/YouGov’s poll of 900 likely Missouri voters from Aug. 8-16 found that 52% of respondents would vote for Amendment 3, which would place constitutional protections for abortion up to fetal viability. Thirty-four percent would vote against the measure, while 14% aren’t sure.By comparison, the SLU/YouGov poll from February found that 44% of voters would back the abortion legalization amendment.St. Louis University political science professor Steven Rogers said 32% of Republicans and 53% of independents would vote for the amendment. That’s in addition to nearly 80% of Democratic respondents who would approve the measure. In the previous poll, 24% of Republicans supported the amendment.Rogers noted that neither Amendment 3 nor a separate ballot item raising the state’s minimum wage is helping Democratic candidates. GOP contenders for U.S. Senate, governor, lieutenant governor, treasurer and secretary of state all hold comfortable leads.“We are seeing this kind of crossover voting, a little bit, where there are voters who are basically saying, ‘I am going to the polls and I’m going to support a Republican candidate, but I’m also going to go to the polls and then I’m also going to try to expand abortion access and then raise the minimum wage,’” Rogers said.Republican gubernatorial nominee Mike Kehoe has a 51%-41% lead over Democrat Crystal Quade. And U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley is leading Democrat Lucas Kunce by 53% to 42%. Some GOP candidates for attorney general, secretary of state and treasurer have even larger leads over their Democratic rivals.

Brian Munoz

/

St. Louis Public RadioHundreds of demonstrators pack into a parking lot at Planned Parenthood of St. Louis and Southwest Missouri on June 24, 2022, during a demonstration following the Supreme Court’s reversal of a case that guaranteed the constitutional right to an abortion.

One of the biggest challenges for foes of Amendment 3 could be financial.Typically, Missouri ballot initiatives with well-funded and well-organized campaigns have a better chance of passing — especially if the opposition is underfunded and disorganized. Since the end of July, the campaign committee formed to pass Amendment 3 received more than $3 million in donations of $5,000 or more.That money could be used for television advertisements to improve the proposal’s standing further, Rogers said, as well as point out that Missouri’s current abortion ban doesn’t allow the procedure in the case of rape or incest.“Meanwhile, the anti side won’t have those resources to kind of try to make that counter argument as strongly, and they don’t have public opinion as strongly on their side,” Rogers said.There is precedent of a well-funded initiative almost failing due to opposition from socially conservative voters.In 2006, a measure providing constitutional protections for embryonic stem cell research nearly failed — even though a campaign committee aimed at passing it had a commanding financial advantage.Former state Sen. Bob Onder was part of the opposition campaign to that measure. He said earlier this month it is possible to create a similar dynamic in 2024 against Amendment 3, if social conservatives who oppose abortion rights can band together.“This is not about reproductive rights or care for miscarriages or IVF or anything else,” said Onder, the GOP nominee for Missouri’s 3rd Congressional District seat. “Missourians will learn that out-of-state special interests and dark money from out of state is lying to them and they will reject this amendment.”Quade said earlier this month that Missourians of all political ideologies are ready to roll back the state’s abortion ban.“Regardless of political party, we hear from folks who are tired of politicians being in their doctor’s offices,” Quade said. “They want politicians to mind their own business. So this is going to excite folks all across the political spectrum.”

[ad_2]

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Democrat Mark Osmack makes his case for Missouri treasurer

Published

on

[ad_1]


Mark Osmack has been out of the electoral fray for awhile, but he never completely abandoned his passion for Missouri politics.Osmack, a Valley Park native and U.S. Army veteran, previously ran for Missouri’s 2nd Congressional District seat and for state Senate. Now he’s the Democratic nominee for state treasurer after receiving a phone call from Missouri Democratic Party Chairman Russ Carnahan asking him to run.“There’s a lot of decision making and processing and evaluation that goes into it, which is something I am very passionate and interested in,” Osmack said this week on an episode of Politically Speaking.Osmack is squaring off against state Treasurer Vivek Malek, who was able to easily win a crowded GOP primary against several veteran lawmakers including House Budget Chairman Cody Smith and state Sen. Andrew Koenig.While Malek was able to attract big donations to his political action committee and pour his own money into the campaign, Osmack isn’t worried that he won’t be able to compete in November. Since Malek was appointed to his post, Osmack contends he hasn’t proven that he’s a formidable opponent in a general election.“His actions and his decision making so far in his roughly two year tenure in that office have been questionable,” Osmack said.Among other things, Osmack was critical of Malek for placing unclaimed property notices on video gaming machines which are usually found in gas stations or convenience stores. The legality of the machines has been questioned for some time.As Malek explained on his own episode of Politically Speaking, he wanted to make sure the unclaimed property program was as widely advertised as possible. But he acknowledged it was a mistake to put the decals close to the machines and ultimately decided to remove them.Osmack said: “This doesn’t even pass the common sense sniff test of, ‘Hey, should I put state stickers claiming you might have a billion dollars on a gambling machine that is not registered with the state of Missouri?’ If we’re gonna give kudos for him acknowledging the wrong thing, it never should have been done in the first place.”Osmack’s platform includes supporting programs providing school meals using Missouri agriculture products and making child care more accessible for the working class.He said the fact that Missouri has such a large surplus shows that it’s possible to create programs to make child care within reach for parents.“It is quite audacious for [Republicans] to brag about $8 billion, with a B, dollars in state surplus, while we offer next to no social services to include pre-K, daycare, or child care,” Osmack said.Here’s are some other topics Osmack discussed on the show:How he would handle managing the state’s pension systems and approving low-income housing tax credits. The state treasurer’s office is on boards overseeing both of those programs.Malek’s decision to cut off investments from Chinese companies. Osmack said that Missouri needs to be cautious about abandoning China as a business partner, especially since they’re a major consumer of the state’s agriculture products. “There’s a way to make this work where we are not supporting communist nations to the detriment of the United States or our allies, while also maintaining strong economic ties that benefit Missouri farmers,” he said.What it was like to witness the skirmish at the Missouri State Fair between U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley and Democratic challenger Lucas Kunce.Whether Kunce can get the support of influential groups like the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which often channels money and staff to states with competitive Senate elections.

[ad_2]

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

As Illinois receives praise for its cannabis equity efforts, stakeholders work on system’s flaws

Published

on

[ad_1]


Medical marijuana patients can now purchase cannabis grown by small businesses as part of their allotment, Illinois’ top cannabis regulator said, but smaller, newly licensed cannabis growers are still seeking greater access to the state’s medical marijuana customers.Illinois legalized medicinal marijuana beginning in 2014, then legalized it for recreational use in 2020. While the 2020 law legalized cannabis use for any adult age 21 or older, it did not expand licensing for medical dispensaries.Patients can purchase marijuana as part of the medical cannabis program at dual-purpose dispensaries, which are licensed to serve both medical and recreational customers. But dual-purpose dispensaries are greatly outnumbered by dispensaries only licensed to sell recreationally, and there are no medical-only dispensaries in the state.As another part of the adult-use legalization law, lawmakers created a “craft grow” license category that was designed to give more opportunities to Illinoisans hoping to legally grow and sell marijuana. The smaller-scale grow operations were part of the 2020 law’s efforts to diversify the cannabis industry in Illinois.Prior to that, all cultivation centers in Illinois were large-scale operations dominated by large multi-state operators. The existing cultivators, mostly in operation since 2014, were allowed to grow recreational cannabis beginning in 2019.Until recently, dual-purpose dispensaries have been unsure as to whether craft-grown products, made by social equity licensees — those who have lived in a disproportionately impacted area or have been historically impacted by the war on drugs — can be sold medicinally as part of a patient’s medical allotment.Erin Johnson, the state’s cannabis regulation oversight officer, told Capitol News Illinois last month that her office has “been telling dispensaries, as they have been asking us” they can now sell craft-grown products to medical patients.“There was just a track and trace issue on our end, but never anything statutorily,” she said.

Dilpreet Raju

/

Capitol News IllinoisThe graphic shows how cannabis grown in Illinois gets from cultivation centers to customers.

No notice has been posted, but Johnson’s verbal guidance comes almost two years after the first craft grow business went online in Illinois.It allows roughly 150,000 medical patients, who dispensary owners say are the most consistent purchasers of marijuana, to buy products made by social equity businesses without paying recreational taxes. However — even as more dispensaries open — the number available to medical patients has not increased since 2018, something the Cannabis Regulation Oversight Office “desperately” wants to see changed. Johnson said Illinois is a limited license state, meaning “there are caps on everything” to help control the relatively new market.Berwyn Thompkins, who operates two cannabis businesses, said the rules limited options for patients and small businesses.“It’s about access,” Thompkins said. “Why wouldn’t we want all the patients — which the (adult-use) program was initially built around — why wouldn’t we want them to have access? They should have access to any dispensary.”Customers with a medical marijuana card pay a 1% tax on all marijuana products, whereas recreational customers pay retail taxes between roughly 20 and 40% on a given cannabis product, when accounting for local taxes.While Illinois has received praise for its equity-focused cannabis law, including through an independent study that showed more people of color own cannabis licenses than in any other state, some industry operators say they’ve experienced many unnecessary hurdles getting their businesses up and running.The state, in fact, announced last month that it had opened its 100th social equity dispensary.But Steve Olson, purchasing manager at a pair of dispensaries (including one dual-purpose dispensary) near Rockford, said small specialty license holders have been left in the lurch since the first craft grower opened in October 2022.“You would think that this would be something they’re (the government) trying to help out these social equity companies with, but they’re putting handcuffs on them in so many different spots,” he said. “One of them being this medical thing.”Olson said he contacted state agencies, including the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, months ago about whether craft products can be sold to medical patients at their retail tax rate, but only heard one response: “They all say it was an oversight.”This potentially hurt social equity companies because they sell wholesale to dispensaries and may have been missing out on a consistent customer base through those medical dispensaries.Olson said the state’s attempts to provide licensees with a path to a successful business over the years, such as with corrective lotteries that granted more social equity licenses, have come up short.“It’s like they almost set up the social equity thing to fail so the big guys could come in and swoop up all these licenses,” Olson said. “I hate to feel like that but, if you look at it, it’s pretty black and white.”Olson said craft companies benefit from any type of retail sale.“If we sell it to medical patients or not, it’s a matter of, ‘Are we collecting the proper taxes?’ That’s all it is,” he said.State revenue from cannabis taxes, licensing costs and other fees goes into the Cannabis Regulation Fund, which is used to fund a host of programs, including cannabis offense expungement, the general revenue fund, and the R3 campaign aiming to uplift disinvested communities.For fiscal year 2024, nearly $256 million was paid out from Cannabis Regulation Fund for related initiatives, which includes almost $89 million transferred to the state’s general revenue fund and more than $20 million distributed to local governments, according to the Illinois Department of Revenue.Medical access still limitedThe state’s 55 medical dispensaries that predate the 2020 legalization law, mostly owned by publicly traded multistate operators that had been operating in Illinois since 2014 under the state’s medical marijuana program, were automatically granted a right to licenses to sell recreationally in January 2020. That gave them a dual-purpose license that no new entrants into the market can receive under current law.Since expanding their clientele in 2020, Illinois dispensaries have sold more than $6 billion worth of cannabis products through recreational transactions alone.Nearly two-thirds of dispensaries licensed to sell to medical patients are in the northeast counties of Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake and Will. Dual-purpose dispensaries only represent about 20 percent of the state’s dispensaries.While the state began offering recreational dispensary licenses since the adult-use legalization law passed, it has not granted a new medical dispensary license since 2018. That has allowed the established players to continue to corner the market on the state’s nearly 150,000 medical marijuana patients.But social equity licensees and advocates say there are more ways to level the playing field, including expanding access to medical sales.Johnson, who became the state’s top cannabis regulator in late 2022, expressed hope for movement during the fall veto session on House Bill 2911, which would expand medical access to all Illinois dispensaries.“We would like every single dispensary in Illinois to be able to serve medical patients,” Johnson said. “It’s something that medical patients have been asking for, for years.”Johnson said the bill would benefit patients and small businesses.“It’s something we desperately want to happen as a state system, because we want to make sure that medical patients are able to easily access what they need,” she said. “We also think it’s good for our social equity dispensaries, as they’re opening, to be able to serve medical patients.”Rep. Bob Morgan, D-Deerfield, who was the first statewide project coordinator for Illinois’ medical cannabis program prior to joining the legislature, wrote in an email to Capitol News Illinois that the state needs to be doing more for its patients.“Illinois is failing the state’s 150,000 medical cannabis patients with debilitating conditions. Too many are still denied the patient protections they deserve, including access to their medicine,” Morgan wrote, adding he would continue to work with stakeholders on further legislation.Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service covering state government. It is distributed to hundreds of newspapers, radio and TV stations statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation, along with major contributions from the Illinois Broadcasters Foundation and Southern Illinois Editorial Association.

[ad_2]

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending