Kansas wants to create a sports authority to own the new Kansas City Chiefs stadium. Public rather than private ownership of the stadium will shield more than $1 billion from being collected as income taxes.

Kansas has agreed to finance 60% of $4 billion in stadium projects. Those projects include a 65,000-seat domed stadium in Kansas City, Kansas, and other developments near the Legends and in Olathe. Kansas will fund the stadium using sales tax and revenue bonds, or STAR bonds.

Those bonds take out debt that will be repaid with future sales tax dollars from inside a stadium district. A sports authority means the stadium will be publicly owned, which means the money collected to repay the bonds won’t be subject to income taxes. If the stadium was privately owned, the revenue being collected to repay the bonds would be subject to income taxes.

Supporters say creating the sports authority prevents the Chiefs from being taxed over $1 billion.

“It establishes the governance framework that allows this project to move from agreement to action, from vision to construction,” said Korb Maxwell, an attorney for the Kansas City Chiefs.

Here’s what else the board does:

Who is on the board? 

The sports authority will have nine voting members. One member would be appointed by the Chiefs, one member appointed by the governor, one member appointed by the secretary from the Kansas Department of Commerce, and six members appointed by legislative leadership — including Democrats.

Board members must live in Kansas. It doesn’t require anyone on the board to live in the Kansas City area.

The mayors of Olathe and the Unified Government of Wyandotte County and Kansas City, Kansas, are allowed to be on the board, but they are not voting members.

Some lawmakers in the joint meeting of the House and Senate commerce committees were concerned about that exclusion. Maxwell said the Chiefs want the authority’s board to be as small as possible, but the team will let the legislature adjust the size of the board as it sees fit.

The Jackson County Sports Complex Authority only has five members. Unlike its Missouri counterpart, the Kansas sports authority board may only be focused on the Chiefs stadium even though the Kansas Speedway and Children’s Mercy Park are nearby.

Officials from the Kansas Speedway would like to join the authority once they pay off their STAR bonds debt in 2027, but including other stadiums would exempt those locations from property taxes as long as they are on the board.

Aside from tax exemptions, why else is the board necessary? 

Maxwell said the sports authority has two major functions, overseeing construction of the project and overseeing administration of a completed stadium. That includes bidding for Final Four games, Super Bowls and major concerts.

It also includes smaller events like high school football championships, maybe even high school soccer or wrestling tournaments, said Bill Faflick, executive director of the Kansas State High School Activities Association.

“Can you imagine even a sport like wrestling,” he said, “where we can bring 24 mats in under the dome … where they would be crowned a champion in the premier venue in the state of Kansas.”

Maxwell said this board will make sure the stadium stays in first-class condition. The Chiefs were already required to contribute at least $7 million annually in rent to a stadium maintenance fund.

Rachel Willis, with the Kansas Department of Commerce, said this board does create more transparency.

There will be meetings that are open to the public, agendas will be posted online, the authority will be subject to open records laws, it will get financial transparency audits, and there will be a sports authority website.

When will the Chiefs stadium be open? 

The stadium will be ready for the start of the 2031 NFL season, the state said. It’ll be at the Legends near the Kansas Speedway.

Multiple speakers told lawmakers on Tuesday the stadium will bring in millions in economic impact to Kansas, even though economists say Kansas relied on inflated economic development projections.

The bill took its first step in the legislative process Tuesday. It still needs to pass through both the House and Senate before it heads to the governor’s desk.

This story was originally published by The Beacon, a fellow member of the KC Media Collective.

TOPEKA, Kan. — A Kansas town known for its prisons is allowing a shuttered private prison to reopen and house immigrants detained for living in the U.S. illegally after a nearly yearlong legal fight amid a massive national push for new detention centers.

The City Commission in Leavenworth on Tuesday approved a permit to private prison operator CoreCivic. Members voted 4-1 to approve a three-year permit with conditions that set minimum staffing levels, ban the housing of minors and provide for a city oversight committee.

“If they don’t follow those guidelines, we can pull the permit,” Mayor Nancy Bauder said before the vote.

The 1,104-bed Midwest Regional Reception Center is 10 miles (16 kilometers) west of the Kansas City International Airport. CoreCivic, one of the nation’s largest private prison operators, said the center will generate $60 million annually once it’s fully open.

Leavenworth, Kansas, sued CoreCivic after it tried to reopen the shuttered prison without city officials signing off on the deal.

The legal battle played out in state and federal courts, with the Department of Justice siding with CoreCivic in legal filings. The department argued that the city was engaged in an “aggressive and unlawful effort” to “interfere with federal immigration enforcement.”

It appears to be the only such legal battle nationally to delay a private prison from opening amid President Donald Trump’s push for mass deportations. The city argued that requiring a permit would prevent future problems, while CoreCivic maintained that it didn’t need a permit and the process would take too long.

Leavenworth was an unlikely foe because the GOP-leaning city’s name alone evokes a shorthand for serving hard time. Prisons employ hundreds of workers locally at two military facilities, the nation’s first federal penitentiary, a Kansas correctional facility and a county jail, all within 6 miles (10 kilometers) of city hall.

CoreCivic stopped housing pretrial detainees for the U.S. Marshals Service in its Leavenworth facility in 2021 after then-President Joe Biden called on the Justice Department to curb the use of private prisons. The American Civil Liberties Union and federal public defenders said inmates’ rights had been violated and there were stabbings, suicides and even one homicide.

The city’s lawsuit described detainees locked in showers as punishment and accused CoreCivic of impeding city police force investigations of sexual assaults and other violent crimes.

Almost four dozen people spoke in opposition to the permit before the commission’s vote. Bauder admonished the crowd several times for being too noisy, and police removed a protester who yelled vulgar comments.

“We, we the people of Leavenworth, are not fooled and we don’t care about their money,” David Benitez, a city resident, told the commission.

Some backers of the permit cited the potential boost to the local economy. Two CoreCivic employees argued for approval, and one of them, Charles Johnson, of Kansas City, Kansas, said his job gave him purpose and allowed his family to get off of state assistance.

“The people I work alongside are caring, professional and committed to doing things the right way,” he said, his comments drawing boos from critics outside the commission’s meeting room.

City Commissioner Holly Pittman said because the city “stood firm,” it could negotiate conditions on the permit. She said denying it would risk a potentially expensive lawsuit.

“I will not gamble the financial stability of this city,” she said before voting yes. “Let me be clear: Approval does not mean endorsement.”

Some 1,700 Kansans had their driver’s licenses invalidated last month. It wasn’t for racking up speeding tickets or a DUI charge, but because they are transgender.

Kansas is one of five states to prohibit trans people from changing the gender marker on their licenses, but it is the first to pass a law that retroactively cancels licenses that were already changed. The law also invalidated birth certificates for those who updated their gender markers.

Hundreds of trans drivers already received letters from the state informing them their documents were “invalid immediately” and they “may be subject to additional penalties” if they continue to drive, unless they surrender the license to the Kansas Division of Vehicles and receive a new one with their birth sex.

“I’m pretty heartbroken,” said Jaelynn Abegg, a 41-year-old trans woman living in Wichita who received a letter. She said she will not turn in her license and plans to move this month to another state.

“It is a continuation of the message that the Legislature has been sending out for years now, and that is that transgender people are not welcome in Kansas,” she said.

Two anonymous trans residents sued Kansas last month, arguing that the law violates state protections for personal autonomy, privacy, equality, due process and freedom of speech. On Tuesday, Douglas County District Judge James McCabria declined to grant a temporary restraining order against the law while the case proceeds.

McCabria wrote in his decision that there isn’t enough evidence to show that trans people will face harassment and discrimination if they have to use bathrooms or show IDs that conflict with their gender identities.

Kansas law was years in the making

Kansas had allowed trans people to update the gender markers on their IDs since 2007. Then in 2023, it changed its legal definition of sex to be male or female and assigned at birth.

Fifteen other states have made a similar change in the past few years — and President Donald Trump issued an executive order declaring that there are only two unchangeable sexes. The State Department now prohibits trans people from changing the gender markers on their passports.

Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach sued the state, arguing that allowing people to update their gender markers violated the 2023 law. Last year, the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed an appeals court decision and allowed gender marker changes to resume.

In January, Kobach backed the new bill he said would “correct an error” by the courts. The state Senate added a provision prohibiting trans people from using bathrooms that align with their gender identities in government-owned buildings. It was passed without public comment. The penalties for violating the provision can be $1,000 for individuals and up to $125,000 for government entities with more than one infraction.

Last month, Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed the bill, saying the Legislature “should stay out of the business of telling Kansans how to go to the bathroom and instead stay focused on how to make life more affordable for Kansans.” Days later, the Republican-held state Legislature overrode her veto.

Kansas House Speaker Daniel Hawkins, a Republican, said in a statement at the time that the law’s purpose was to protect women. “This isn’t about scoring political points, but doing what’s right for women and girls across our communities,” he said, according to the Kansas Reflector. Hawkins did not respond to NBC News’ request for comment.

State Rep. Mark Schreiber, the only Republican to vote against the bill, told NBC News he agreed with the appeals court that Kobach could not show how allowing trans people to change the gender markers on their licenses caused harm to the state.

“I don’t have any trans folks in my family, but I know trans people,” he said, adding that they aren’t looking for special privileges and just want to live their lives. “And we seem to keep passing laws that keep getting in the way of that.”

Harper Seldin, one of the ACLU attorneys involved in the lawsuit, said during court arguments Friday that the Kansas Legislature singled out trans Kansans “for unique social stigma.”

“They were suddenly required, with no notice or opportunity to be heard, to present themselves to the DMV to obtain driver’s licenses that announced to everyone — the teller at the bank, the clerk at the hotel, the poll worker on election day — that they are transgender,” Seldin said.

Trans people have long reported facing more harassment and discrimination while using IDs that don’t align with their gender identity or expression, and many trans Kansans said they fear that their daily risk of facing such harassment would only increase as a result of the law.

‘There was no plan whatsoever’

Over the last five years, dozens of states have considered bills targeting transgender people, but the majority of those have targeted people’s ability to play on school sports teams that align with their gender identities and minors’ access to transition-related care. In the last few years, state and federal policies have shifted to focus on changing legal definitions of sex and restricting access to updated identity documents.

Logan Casey, director of policy research at the Movement Advancement Project, an LGBTQ think tank that tracks legislation, described these broader laws as “gender regulation laws” that attack the fundamental rights and identity of trans people.

“The point all along for the people pushing these bills and these attacks has been to single out transgender people and create a license to discriminate against transgender people and remove them from public life,” he said. “In effect, trying to get them to stop being transgender.”

Kansas’ law took effect immediately after it was published in the register Feb. 26. A spokesperson for the Kansas Department of Revenue told the Kansas Reflector that the law invalidated about 1,700 licenses. The department did not respond to a request for comment. During the court hearing Friday, Kobach said the department had so far sent letters to 275 Kansans and 138 had received new licenses.

Andrea Ellis, a 34-year-old trans woman living in Wellington, said she received a letter Wednesday even though she never changed the gender marker on her license — she only legally changed her name on it in December. She drove to the DMV the next day, where she said staff were confused about what to do and said her license had a “flag” on it.

They cut the corner off her license and gave her a temporary one. But later that day, they called her and said she had to return to the DMV because they made an error. When she went back, she said they gave her another temporary license that looked the same as the first.

“They claim that it was thought out, and everything else, but there was no grace period unlike any other kind of rollout program,” Ellis said. “There was no plan whatsoever.”

Some trans residents, like Matthew Neumann, said they still haven’t received any notification regarding their licenses. Neumann, who is the executive director of the LGBTQ Foundation of Kansas, said he’s been checking the validity of his license every day on the Kansas Department of Revenue website, and it’s still valid as of Friday.

Neumann said his organization has raised funds to help trans Kansans pay to update their licenses. Getting a license with an updated gender marker costs $8.75, while receiving a new ID is $26.

Neumann has lived in Larned, Kansas, for 20 years and said he will never leave. He said he’s been threatened over his restroom use, and he fears he could face more harassment under the new law.

“I’m just disappointed and frustrated,” he said. “I’m just hoping that maybe this is the wake up call we need,” he said.