So we're still kicking around the idea of a new, 1 billion dollar, single terminal for our airport or doing the fiscally and environmentally responsible thing and revamping the existing ones. Seems our Kansas City Star wrote and posted an article by local opinion-meister Steve Rose. I found the article under this headline:
But on Facebook, last evening, it was posted under this heading and I think it's far more accurate.
Kansas City Council must avoid a public vote on KCI upgrade
Steve Rose claims that, "for the good of the entire metro, Kansas City must get around a public vote and not allow the naysayers to set the agenda for Kansas City’s future."
What gets me about this is that Mr. Rose is saying not only should we commit to spending a billion dollars or so on a new, single terminal, throwing and walking away from the existing but screw you, Kansas Citians, we also don't want your opinion on the matter.
What part of Democracy is that?
We have a functioning airport. It was and still is a good design. It could be upgraded and redone FAR more responsibly and efficiently both in money and design, achieve the security and other goals we want and need and save untold millions of dollars.
The Airport Authority has been intentionally not keeping up the existing buildings because they're gunning for a pretty, shiny, new, very expensive airport and gift to themselves.
Here's what we ought to do.
For security, let's have all travelers go to and enter what is now Terminal B. Then, those same travelers could go to their gate for their flight, either in that same Terminal B or, by added walkways, out to either Terminal A or B.
If you look at Denver's airport, as one great example, you know they have transportation from the check in building, out to the gates and flights. We're helped greatly because we don't need to do the shuttles they did.
This would be extremely workable and again, fiscally and environmentally responsible, both. It would keep costs for the airport down.
It's the right thing to do.
And all of this includes asking the people in the area--who will have to pay for it all, don't kid yourselves--what they want.
Anything less is an economic dictatorship.