Chiefs' Move to Kansas Raises Questions About Taxpayer Subsidies

Missouri State Auditor reflects on the team's decision to relocate and the implications for taxpayers on both sides of the state line.

Published on Feb. 15, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

In a guest commentary, Missouri State Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick discusses the Kansas City Chiefs' decision to move their home stadium from Missouri to Kansas. Fitzpatrick initially felt anger over the move, but has come to see it as a positive for Missouri taxpayers, who have long subsidized the team and other regional assets. He argues that the record-breaking $6 billion taxpayer subsidy secured by the Chiefs in Kansas is an unwise investment that will divert funds from essential government services.

Why it matters

The Chiefs' relocation highlights the ongoing debate around the use of taxpayer funds to subsidize professional sports teams. While Kansas has agreed to the largest such subsidy in history, Fitzpatrick argues this is not a wise investment and will hamper the state's ability to fund other priorities. The decision also raises questions about the regional dynamics between Kansas and Missouri, and whether one state should be expected to continually subsidize assets that benefit the entire metropolitan area.

The details

The Chiefs announced they would be leaving Missouri for Kansas, prompting an angry reaction from Fitzpatrick, a lifelong Chiefs fan. However, he has since reconsidered his stance, arguing that the record-breaking $6 billion taxpayer subsidy secured by the team in Kansas is an unwise investment that will divert funds from essential government services. Fitzpatrick notes that while no deal is finalized, the Royals appear poised to remain in Missouri, where he believes they belong.

  • The Chiefs announced their plans to relocate to Kansas in 2026.
  • The new Chiefs stadium in Kansas is expected to open by 2030, replacing the iconic Arrowhead Stadium.

The players

Scott Fitzpatrick

Missouri State Auditor and lifelong Kansas City Chiefs fan.

Clark Hunt

Owner of the Kansas City Chiefs.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“I have to say thank you to Kansas taxpayers. I know over the last couple-hundred years, we've had our differences, but brothers fight. That's how it works. They don't stop being brothers. We share one of the greatest cities in the world and for too long, Missouri taxpayers have been subsidizing Kansans without receiving much in return.”

— Scott Fitzpatrick, Missouri State Auditor (kansascity.com)

“Obviously, we'd love to keep you in Missouri, but if we do, it will be a business decision for us now, as your decision to move to Kansas was for you.”

— Scott Fitzpatrick, Missouri State Auditor (kansascity.com)

What’s next

The Kansas City, Kansas metropolitan area will need to approve the $6 billion in taxpayer subsidies for the new Chiefs stadium, a deal that some experts say may face challenges given the scale of the project.

The takeaway

The Chiefs' move to Kansas highlights the ongoing debate around the use of taxpayer funds to subsidize professional sports teams. While Kansas has agreed to the largest such subsidy in history, the deal raises questions about whether these investments are the best use of public resources, especially when they may come at the expense of other essential government services.