Jackson County Executive Frank White Jr. wants the Royals and Chiefs to pay the nearly $1 million it has cost county taxpayers to put the stadiums sales tax measure on the April 2 ballot.

Noting that the tax, if passed, will generate more than $2 billion over its 40-year life for the benefit of the teams, White sent a letter on Thursday to Chiefs owner Clark Hunt and Royals majority owner John Sherman asking them to cover the cost of having the election.

Revenue from the tax would help pay for a portion of the costs of building a new estimated $2 billion Royals stadium and ballpark district in Kansas City’s East Crossroads neighborhood and cover a sizable amount of the $800 million renovation the Chiefs have planned for Arrowhead Stadium.

Currently, the county’s plan is to reimburse itself for the election costs from revenues received from the new sales tax. But if the ballot measure fails, county government would bear that cost. It can’t come out of the revenues generated by the current 3/8th-cent sales tax, which is earmarked for paying off the debt incurred in 2006 for the renovations of Kauffman and Arrowhead Stadiums., as well as for reimbursing the teams for stadium operations, maintenance and repairs.

If Question 1 passes, the current tax would be repealed and a new 3/8th-cent tax would take effect. If the measure fails to pass, then the current tax would run until September 2031.

If approved, a resolution on the agenda for Monday’s regular meeting of the county legislature would instruct the county’s finance director to issue the Kansas City Election Board a check for $745,153 and one for $235,850 to the Jackson County Election Board as the county’s share of holding the election.

Cities and school districts within the county also have things on the ballot and pay a proportional share.

County government has nothing on the ballot other than the stadium issue, and those elections costs were not built into the county’s annual budget, White said.

“As the steward of Jackson County’s fiscal health and community welfare, I am faced with the immediate concern of covering the $1,000,000 cost associated with conducting this unplanned special election—an expenditure not budgeted for in our fiscal year 2024 budge,” White said in his letter. “This unforeseen expense necessitates consideration of drawing from our emergency reserves, a decision that poses a significant dilemma given our commitment to safeguarding the county’s financial stability.”

The county legislature approved this year’s budget on Dec. 18, a month and a day before legislators voted to override White’s veto and put Question 1 on the April ballot.