Royals are exploring stadium sites outside downtown KC. But wasn’t that their vision?

Some 23 months ago, the Royals launched a "listening tour," they called it, an attempt to sell Kansas City on the idea of downtown baseball.

OK, baseball in downtown, they said — before, hey, how about baseball in the Northtown ?

Two years later now, the Royals have expanded their stadium considerations once more:

town.

In the topic lit by an eternal flame, the Royals have been exploring additional stadium locations, including one at the former Sprint campus near 117th Street and Nall Avenue in Kansas, several sources confirmed to The Star.

Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas mentioned the Royals looking at sites in Kansas, which would require support by STAR bonds legislation passed in June , in a radio interview this month.

Recognizing it is certainly not the only location still under consideration, those with knowledge of the discussions characterized the Johnson County setting as a real and viable option. , not

While we could dig into the pros and cons of that, it's hard to overlook the obvious: A Kansas location is a rather untidy fit to the vision the Royals described on the opening night of that tour.

You know, downtown baseball.

This ain't that. But is that still alive?

"I think it would be incorrect for anybody to say that downtown has been (eliminated), unless the city, the state and the Royals have just been wasting a lot of time as recently as last week," Lucas said in a brief interview, adding, "I think Kansas City and the state of Missouri are in an active position. We're going through extensive work.

"The Royals need to find a way to get us all moved beyond this first-date scenario that we're in consistently — and start making real plans."

The Royals did not comment for this column. Since the April vote failed, they have repeatedly stated their intention to explore all possibilities. Thus, they did not publicize the possibility of a move to Johnson County, even as it has been under consideration for several weeks in their ongoing explorations.

To date, those explorations have yet to produce concrete plans for a location.

A lot of concepts, though.

The team and city continue to talk about Washington Square Park downtown near Crown Center, as reported by The Star in August. Lucas estimated either he or a staff member has talked with the Royals more than 20 times combined since Jackson County voters rejected a shared Royals and Chiefs stadium measure seven months ago.

He most recently spoke with Royals majority owner John Sherman last week, and "I obviously wasn't talking about Kansas sites or other sites around the world," he said.

That hasn't been enough to progress something across the finish line in Kansas City. Instead, the team's search marches on — widening in recent weeks rather than narrowing on a final decision. Since its inception, the Royals' search for a stadium location has floated more than a dozen possibilities, a moving target that requires its interested observers to participate in a game of Whac-A-Mole.

They have returned to put another coin in the arcade machine post-vote. But there's a distinct difference in this post-vote round:

The scope of the search extended beyond downtown Kansas City after the STAR bonds measure passed. Let's remember the root of the stadium dialogue — and their original rationale for wanting to leaving Kauffman Stadium when the lease expires in 2031. They sought to re-locate to the heart of the city and join its vibrancy.

Just consider this quote, taken straight from their listening tour :

"Our exploration has shown us that downtown Kansas City is younger, more diverse and growing at a faster clip than anywhere else in the Greater Kansas City metropolitan area," the Royals said then. "We've seen the success of the T-Mobile Center downtown, and we view a ballpark district as a chance to build off its momentum, while significantly expanding that area's offerings and opportunities. ... We would have the opportunity to revitalize another part of our region and enhance Kansas City's growing presence culturally, socially and economically."

That segment of the presentation even began with two words: "Why downtown?"

Sherman later underscored the importance of using a stadium project to help the underserved.

That was persuasion. Originally.

This would represent a massive shift in preference, but I'll pause to emphasize this once more: The Royals have not announced a thing. They have signaled only consideration, not a final decision, and any scrutiny ought to be placed into that context.

It is certainly still possible the organization would have some hesitation for all of these very reasons — because it would not be the equivalent of squeezing a square peg into a round hole; it would be closer to lighting a stick of dynamite and placing it nearby.

Yes, you could point out that the Royals already tried downtown — that the Crossroads District proposal at the former KC Star printing press pavilion failed and failed decidedly with Jackson County residents in April. But the voters were presented a disorganized plan that lacked details and overflowed with last-minute modifications.

Here's what is important to know in this discussion now, as options elsewhere emerged: That ballot failure did not eliminate their last option for downtown baseball. It changed the option for downtown baseball — and altered the funding source.

Lucas has been aggressive in finding a solution — to the point in which I asked him this summer if it was appropriate to offer city-incentive packages for a project the voters just rejected. In other words, was the city doing too ?

Shortly after the vote, Kansas City hired a firm to analyze the viability of various locations that had emerged over the previous year-plus before talks with the Royals pushed one to the front: Washington Square Park.

The Royals have separately but relatedly asked for several-hundred million dollars from the state of Missouri, which this month elected Mike Kehoe as its new governor, to help fund a downtown ballpark, sources said. Those who spoke with me doubt that ask is realistic.

In talks with at least some lawmakers, the Royals have not shared estimates for what they envision to be a more precise total project cost for a new stadium or how much they plan to contribute toward a total, multiple sources said.

Any proposal in Kansas would be buoyed by the STAR bonds legislation that lawmakers passed this year to authorize the state to cover up to 70% of stadium costs. If delivered, that could certainly be an attraction for either the Chiefs or the Royals, depending on their preferences.

"I think the border war that this has reignited is unhelpful," Lucas said. "I think that what we are continually seeing is this ongoing discussion that's basically looking for a better deal all the time — and I guess everyone has the right to do that — but not just me, but my peers in Kansas and everyone has a responsibility to the taxpayers ultimately."

In case it's not clear, Lucas has intentionally implied that as the talks continue to grow outside his jurisdiction, his patience continues to shrink. It's not just him. Outgoing Missouri Governor Mike Parson has also expressed a desire for the Royals to reach a resolution sooner than later.

It's been a minute.

During a debate as he campaigned for mayor, Lucas was asked a question about downtown baseball. That was 2019.

The topic has survived his entire mayorship. It has spanned three Chiefs Super Bowl championships. Heck, the Chiefs, in their own search of a Plan B, have won two Super Bowls since the Royals held the listening tour.

It's imperative the Royals do their due diligence on every site. It would be malpractice not to do so. Or it might cost you, say, a public vote if you are unable to have details solidified.

I'll offer this for comparison's sake, though: The Kansas City Current, KC's women's soccer team, was founded two years Lucas took a question on downtown baseball during his mayoral campaign. That organization established plans for a downtown Kansas City stadium, selected a location, built it and have now played more than a dozen matches inside the venue.

Without a hitch.

It's vital to get the decision right. This is yet one more option before the Royals. And it's been a short seven months since the ballot box demanded a reset.

A long five years, though.