A "recap" of the Chiefs tax credit dispute

This is how the controversy surrounding the Chiefs' $25 million tax credit deal is described in today's News-Press:

To recap, a Missouri Department of Economic Development official said last week that the state wouldn’t issue the credits unless the Chiefs committed to running its summer training camp in St. Joseph for 10 straight years.

The Chiefs, in a letter of intent and public announcements this winter, had stated a pledge of five years plus five one-year renewable options to Missouri Western State University, which is building a $14 million-plus indoor stadium facility with a $10 million donation from the Chiefs.

But economic development officials contend the Missouri Development Finance Board actually voted in December on a 10-year commitment and have taken issue with the five-year deal that both sides agreed to in the camp’s final contract. The final contract hasn’t been signed by all parties, however.

That's the complete "recap." Last week, an unnamed official at the Dept. of Economic Development asked for a 10 year commitment. Last winter, the Chiefs pledged five years, plus five one-year options. "Officials contend" that the MDFB voted on a 10-year deal. "Both sides" agreed to the 5 year deal. End of "recap."

Conspicuously absent from the "recap" are some rather important details that might help readers in St. Joe understand why this isn't quite an honest dispute between two parties.

• The MDFB's own lawyer admits that there are at least three "inconsistencies" between what was presented to the Board and what was actually negotiated by Peter Kinder's office:
  • the length of the Chiefs’ commitment
  • how much the team will pay for the training facility
  • whether it can move the camp elsewhere in Missouri should Western not finish the facility on time
• Moments before the MDFB awarded $25 million in tax credits, the Chiefs Senior Vice President promised that the training camp would be in Missouri “for a minimum of ten years."
• An economic impact study prepared for the Chiefs a month before the meeting also describes a “commitment” by the team to hold camp at Missouri Western for 10 years, and bases its findings on those terms.
• The same reporter from the News-Press wrote on December 12 that the terms of the deal stated that Missouri Western would be "the the future site of the training camp in 2010 and for the next 10 years as long as the facilities are constructed."
• The Associated Press reported on December 13 that the deal required the Chiefs to "pitch camp in 2010, and for the next 10 years."
• The Kansas City Star reported on December 16 that the deal required the training camp to be at Missouri Western "for at least 10 years."

The News-Press piece includes a quote from Sen. Tim Green -- "The public, I think, has been lied to" -- but no explanation of how Green might have reached that conclusion.  It also includes a summary of hometown Sen. Charlie Shields' position -- "he believed members fully understood that the Chiefs had committed to a five-year-plus-five option when they took their vote" -- but no explanation of how Shields might have reached that conclusion. 

There have been a number of articles about the lies and inconsistencies on the deal -- reporter Alyson Raletz is surely aware of their existence -- which make it hard to understand why such a simplistic account would be published. To Raletz's credit, she did start reporting a less-than-10-year deal before anyone else (as far as I can tell). That said, I don't think her readers have seen a breakdown of the Chiefs' lies or MDFB "inconsistencies" that would help them understand the essence of the conflict. 

Instead, they saw editorials in the News-Press breaking down the costs and benefits of the deal over a ten year span:

Our Opinion: Value Chiefs for long term
Sunday, January 18, 2009

Two points we all should agree on concerning the financial realities of bringing the Kansas City Chiefs’ training camp to St. Joseph:

- This is a long-term play. The considerable community investment required should be viewed in that context — as an investment that will have value years into the future.

- The timing is non-negotiable. The Chiefs have made River Falls, Wis., their summer headquarters for 18 years. St. Joseph has sought the camp for at least eight years, and now has a firm agreement as long as it fulfills its commitments. There is zero chance we will have this opportunity again.

The latest numbers discussed include a requested $2.25 million from the city of St. Joseph and $1.5 million from Buchanan County. About $1.2 million will come from the Max Experience fees already being paid by Missouri Western State University students. The remaining $750,000 will need to be raised from other sources, possibly private donations and the sale of naming rights.

The local shares total about $5.7 million, or a contribution equivalent to $570,000 yearly for 10 years. The Chiefs, meanwhile, will use state tax credits to fund the remaining $10 million of the project.

"Long term play."  A "firm agreement." The editorial board's math was consistent with the public promises for a ten year deal, and consistent with the commitment made to the MDFB when they approved the $25 million tax credit. Except under the agreement struck between the Chiefs and Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder's office, of course, the timing was quite negotiable after 2015, and completely up to the Chiefs.

It's entirely possible that the News-Press has a set of documents and commitments at odds with what was reported by the Star and AP, and at odds with what was presented to the MDFB. If so, we'd love to see them, to a get a more complete picture of what's gone wrong.

Either way, just ignoring the admissions of "inconsistencies" from the MDFB's own lawyer, the reporting from the AP and The Star, the minutes from the MDFB meeting,  etc., in a "recap" story on the conflict is really hard to understand.