JOIN OUR WHATSAPP CHANNEL
Despite Campaign Efforts Chiefs FAILED in Convincing Voters to Pass Arrowhead Stadium Renovation Bill; HERE'S WHY
The Kansas City Chiefs fell short of convincing the voters to pass their referendum despite their marketing efforts. Here's why they failed to convince the voters.
On April 2, Jackson County voters rejected a referendum that would have been used to renovate the Kansas City Chiefs' Arrowhead Stadium. The Chiefs even put great effort into using marketing campaigns to influence voters, but the referendum was ultimately rejected.
What's the Referendum Proposed by Chiefs?
The Kansas City Chiefs have been riding huge waves since their Super Bowl win this February. It's the franchise's third Super Bowl win in the last five years. A home stadium has a lot to do with winning games. The Tennessee Titans and Buffalo Bills received taxpayer handouts for better and new stadiums in the last two years.
But they failed when Kansas City Chiefs and his MLB partner in efforts, the Kansas City Royals, decided to walk the same path. On April 2, 2024, the Jackson County voters rejected a referendum presented by these two teams. The referendum was targeted to extend the local sales tax for the coming 40 years.
Also Read: Chiefs' President Mark Donovan's HOT STATEMENT After Team Lost Renovation Vote for Arrowhead Stadium
This extension was to receive $2 billion in public funding, which could be used to renovate Arrowhead Stadium. For the Kansas City Royals, it would have been for a new baseball stadium downtown. But despite putting out marketing campaigns, the Chiefs failed to convince the voters in their favor. 
Why Was Referendum by Chiefs Rejected by Voters?
Sports leagues and team owners have been claiming how arenas and stadiums generate economic returns for years. However, according to Victor Matheson's survey over the last three years, it has turned out otherwise. In fact, a recent survey of more than 130 studies concluded that stadiums don't have much of any returns.
The direct return on investments made to build the stadiums with public money fell short of the required return. Even if we include non-monetary benefits like civic pride or quality of life, the survey simply concludes: "The large subsidies commonly devoted to constructing professional sports venues are not justified as worthwhile public investments."
Voters are aware of this, and as much as team owners try to glorify the importance of having a good stadium, everything falls short of convincing voters. In fact, the Chiefs also tried using threats like leaving the stadium, but that didn't work well either. So now, either the Chiefs could play in the same stadium or find a new one.
