A Less Convenient, More Congested, Extremely Expensive and Completely Unnecessary Single Terminal Airport

A friend--an architect, no less--made this very clear, intelligent, fair observation this past week out on Facebook. (See link and credit below).

Mayor Sly James and The Kansas City Star and all kinds of people and organizations have come out for this new, single terminal, more-than-one-billion-dollar-boondoggle of an airport, saying, now it's "fiscally responsible" (it's anything but) and the right thing to do and the way to go forward with progress and the city. They also claim it will be just as convenient as our current airport and terminals.

To which I and a lot of us out here promptly say "bunk."

Think about this.

If, God forbid, the "New KCI" people and vote wins this coming week, we would get, yes, a single terminal airport. Sure, it will blow through more than 1 billion dollars that we don't need to and shouldn't spend and it will make flying in and out of Kansas City far more expensive and it's grossly, fiscally and environmentally irresponsible but there's one more thing.

We would get that one, single security check in.

Think how that works at other airports.

Think of the lines, the long, long lines just to get to security, that one security check in at all those other airports. Then think of waiting to get through that security.

We don't have that now. With our current terminals, we don't have those abominable long lines and long, long waits.

And Mayor James and the Star and others are going to tell us it will be just as convenient?

That there won't be long lines?

Really?

And people are going to fall for that?

Vote NO Tuesday, November 7 on Question 1.

Save KCI! | Better Solutions Come From Better Discussions

Save KCI - Home | Facebook

Save KCI (@SaveKCI) · Twitter

Link:

Sven Erik Alstrom

Now the New KCI People Are Trying to Threaten US

From the Star yesterday:

If the KCI vote fails next week, city leaders say there’s no ‘Plan B’

They mean to say they have no intention or goal to keep up the place or run it well or run it right and manage it correctly?

Really?

So just because they have no plan or plans---or profess to not have any---we should vote for a more than 1 billion dollar redo at the airport?

Really?

Anyone else feel like they’re being threatened or blackmailed here besides me?

Naturally they’re going to say there’s “no plan b.” Sure they do. They want their big, new plan. I get that.

But how about, if they lose, as they should, after this vote, how about they do just that, take care of the facility, open it up, maintain it, get restaurants in, open up the restrooms, all of it? The whole thing.

Save KCI! | Better Solutions Come From Better Discussions

Save KCI - Home | Facebook

Friends of KCI - Home | Facebook

Suddenly, A New Airport Is "Fiscally Responsible"

As I said earlier here, I've been receiving big postcards here in Brookside, daily, telling us all why we should vote for the billion dollar plus boondoggle that is a new, single terminal airport. I didn't get one yesterday but today got two.

And on both of these today, they both repeated the same, very familiar phrase.

The whole idea of paying out more than one billion dollars--because it will be more than one billion dollars, folks, for a new single terminal airport here in town, let there be no doubt--is both fiscally and environmentally irresponsible.

I've said it repeatedly.

Fiscally irresponsible.

So what phrase is added today, to these new postcards from the "vote for a new terminal" folks?

Oh, yes. On both of them, they suddenly say "fiscally responsible."

They ripped me off.

Suddenly, suddenly they're touting a completely new airport terminal as "fiscally responsible."

The previous day, on the post card for that day, as proof, they called it "fiscally smart."

Forget that it will cost us more than 1 billion dollars.

Forget that we're walking away from 3 existing, functioning, convenient, attractive, very practical terminals and other buildings and facilities there so they can be torn down and thrown away.

Forget that we could spend far, far less on our existing facilities and get the security we need and the restaurants and all the other facilities we want and need.

Forget all that.

They're saying we should only throw away the old buildings, build new and spend, spend, spend.

Since when is spending more--in this case, a lot more--to get  what you want and need "fiscally responsible"?

Only now does that make sense and only according to the "new KCI" people.

So they ripped me off for the phrase. Great for them.

They should give me residuals.

The fact is, building a new airport is not only unnecessary but fiscally irresponsible.

And very much so.

Save KCI! | Better Solutions Come From Better Discussions

Save KCI - Home | Facebook

Save KCI (@SaveKCI) · Twitter

The New KCI People Are Getting Desperate

Here in Brookside, we've gotten a large postcard nearly every day from the "Better KCI" group, pointing out why they think we should have a new, single terminal airport, even with it taking more than 1 billion dollars to do so.

Yesterday's postcard shows, as the headline says, that these people are getting desperate.

They've begun repeating the same, old, tired ideas now. Today was this.

All they could say today, with this postcard was that our current airport needs updates--tell us something we don't know---and that they would cost $500,000.

Let's put this in perspective.

First, suddenly $500,00 is a lot of money.

They want 1 billion dollars for this new, single terminal airport--actually, it will be more than 1 billion dollars, more than twice as much---but they're suddenly complaining about spending too much money.

Talk about trying to have it both ways. Wow.

So one half billion dollars is A LOT but more than one billion just ain't that much.

What utter, ridiculous nonsense.

Spending only one half of what they propose for a new airport, to get and keep what we need seems clearly very sensible. Why on Earth would or should we throw away good, very convenient, intelligent, already built buildings, modernize and update them and continue to use them?

It makes eminent sense.

On the postcard yesterday, they say: "Our airport was built in 1972 and it's served us well, but it's past our prime."

And that, right there ladies and gentlemen, is our problem. It is one of America's problems. We've seen it, repeatedly, down through decades and the short last century here in the US.

After about 40 or 50 years, we think we need to somehow "move on", tear down a building--in this case, buildings--and press forward with progress somehow. All across Europe, they have functioning buildings, hundreds of years old but we have to tear ours down, build new, start all over again and begin anew.

This is fiscally irresponsible. And that's what's wrong with this plan of theirs. It is fiscally irresponsible. Actually, to be clear and accurate, it is grossly irresponsible, fiscally. That's ignoring the fact that it's also environmentally irresponsible. I won't even touch on that.

There is no reason in the world why we cannot update, modernize and yes, improve our existing 3 terminals at our airport, get the security we need and continue to use these buildings, these facilities.

I say again, the Airport Authority, our Airport Authority has been conniving for a new airport and for years. To get it, they have ignored and neglected maintenance and not worked to get restaurants at these existing terminals, all so they could say today and for the last several years that we needed a new airport, a new building and that what we have isn't working and doesn't work.

Again, I repeat, look at the statistics. Our airport keeps increasing the numbers of flights, month after month and year over year yet they say it isn't working and we need a new airport.

​DOT data: Passenger traffic, 

airline revenue increasing at KCI

KCI Passenger Growth Continued 

in November

KCI Airport Passenger Traffic Up 

for 13th Straight Month

Kansas City International Airport Reports 

One Million Passengers

KCI breaking records 

with one million passengers served in August

Annual passengers at KCI Airport exceed 11 million in 2016 

KCI Passengers Up 8.8 Percent in February

KCI Passengers Up Three Percent in April

KCI topped 1 million passengers in May 2017

Kansas City International Airport Reports 

Third Busiest July on Record

KCI Passengers up 6.6 Percent in November

Kansas City International Airport 

Reports 37th Consecutive Month of

 Passenger Growth

So please, all you people at "Better KCI"?  Mayor James? Airport Authority? Cut it out. Stop lying to us. Stop misrepresenting the truth. Stop redefining the way things are up there at the airport because even given how badly the Airport Authority is running and not maintaining it, it's still increasing in flights, statistically. 

So with, actually, some good and decent and fair and intelligent updating and modernizing---and for far, far less money---we good have that stellar airport you keep describing.

And we'd save hundreds of millions of dollars doing it, in the meantime.

Vote no---a resounding, responsible NO--on Question 1 next week, November 7.

Links:

Save KCI! | Better Solutions Come From Better Discussions

Friends of KCI

Save KCI - Home | Facebook

Save KCI (@SaveKCI) · Twitter

Today's New Airport Lie Du Jour

Okay, here we go again.

I got yet another postcard yesterday, lying to me, to all of us, about how we "need a new airport" and all the reasons behind it.

Today's blatant ugliness and misrepresentation of truth and facts blares out the following:

"A Better KCI =

Thousands of Jobs +
More Than $! Billion
in Economic Impact"

And see? Here's what's wrong, so very wrong about that.

First, when they call it "economic impact", they describe it as "more than $1 billion."

But when they talk about cost? When they talk about the price of this boondoggle?

Then they only call it $1 billion.

I say again, don't kid yourself, ladies and gentlemen, let's not kid ourselves. If they get this shiny, new, single terminal airport, it's going to cost MORE THAN 1 BILLION DOLLARS.

Let there be no doubt.

Second, this thing calls for "thousands of jobs."

Well, yeah, sure. I get that, we get that. It takes lots of people to build an airport.

But guess what?

Those are temporary jobs. The airport only takes so long to build. Then those jobs go away.

As a matter of fact, the new, single terminal airport they're proposing would actually have FEWER gates than the 3 terminals we have now. Seems as though, if they get their shiny new toy, there would be LESS jobs, ultimately, since fewer people would be needed to run the place.

I propose an alternate idea and solution, once more.

How about we only spend half of that? Or, heck, even two-thirds that much, of that 1 billion dollars, and update and modernize and repair our existing airport, instead of throwing it away?

--We end up with the better, more functioning and better looking airport we want and need
--We don't blow through more than 1 billion dollars
--We don't end up walking away from and almost literally throwing away 3 good, functioning, attractive, very convenient buildings and a lot of others
--and finally, we don't end up raising the prices of the tickets for flying in and out of our city.

Because while the Mayor and all the proponents of this new, more than 1 billion dollar airport want to keep saying "It won't be paid for with your taxes" or "We don't end up paying for it", we do, in fact, end up paying for it.

We pay for it in higher prices to fly into and out of our city and region.

Which brings up another one of their lies.

They say this new airport is supposed to bring more people to our city.

In the first place, I've shown here, earlier, how our current airport, as badly and poorly managed as it has been and is, up to now, has seen month to month and year to year growth in the numbers of people using our airport. So already that's not an isssue.

So how, exactly, do you INCREASE the number of people coming into your city and region by RAISING THE PRICE, the cost of doing just that, of flying into your city?

And of course the answer is, you don't.

So let's get serious. Let's get real here.

Let's start being responsible, modernize and update and repair our existing airport and terminals, make them more attractive and functional again while we also do the fiscally responsible thing as well as the environmentally responsible.

It's not as "fun" or sexy as talking about a bright, shiny, new, single terminal airport but it's the smart  and right thing to do.

Save KCI! | Better Solutions Come From Better Discussions

savekci.org

Save KCI - Home | Facebook

Save KCI (@SaveKCI) | Twitter

The 500 Million Dollar Lie About the Airport We Keep Hearing

Another thing we all keep hearing from our Mayor Sly James and the new airport supporters, that our current airport "...needs $500 million dollars in repairs just to keep it operating with no improvements."

Excuse me?

They're trying to say that if we give our currently functioning airport 5oo million dollars---one half billion dollars---in improvements that it wouldn't be vastly improved and functioning and looking, both, better than it is now?

Really?

That is very difficult to believe in the extreme.

It already works. It's already increasing in flights in and out of our city, month after month and year after year and if we add 500 hundred million dollars of updates and improvements, it won't do and be doing what we need?

Please.   That's just absurd.

As for jobs, spending $500 million dollars for those updates and improvements would create plenty of local construction jobs so that argument is taken from them, as well.

So, another misrepresentation.

What will the new lie be tomorrow?

Save KCI!

Save KCI

Every Day Now, Some New Lie About a New Airport

Really, it's come down to one new lie, more misrepresentations about the old and new airports every day now.

Today, in the mail, yet another big postcard, telling me, us, why we should spend more than one billion dollars on a new airport.

Here's what came today----

It says we should buy and spend and build this new airport because:

"A Better KCI Brings More Jobs and Businesses to KC"

Whoa.

Slow down there, cowboy.

Let's look at that.

First, a new airport, more than one billion dollars or no (and it will be more than 1 billion dollars, let's not kid ourselves) will no way "bring more jobs."

Oh, sure, it will bring some construction jobs.  For a while. For as long as it takes to make it.

What is that?

A year? 18 months? Two years?

But that's it.

There would be some construction jobs and then they'd go away.

And then the other half.

Bring more "businesses to KC"?

Since when did a business--any business except airport food service--take more jobs to a city just because they have a new airport?

It doesn't happen.

That's just silly.

No company goes around to other cities, looking at their airport to decide where they're going to locate first.  That's absurd.

That's when, on this postcard today they say "That's why we need a better KCI."

The fact is, I say again, we don't need a new airport. We need an airport authority that will see to the updating and modernizing of the airport we have. It's only as "out of date" as they have ignored and neglected it and let it be and stay undone and unattractive and less functional because they want a shiny new bauble in a single terminal airport, complete with it's billion plus dollar price tag.

The postcard today says "Kansas City can compete and win the new Amazon headquarters, which will bring 50,000 new jobs and billion in economic development."

That sounds like a guarantee to me. And it's a guarantee they can't deliver.

Yes, we need "a better KCI."  Sure. And all we need to do for it is take care of and modernize and update the airport we have. We absolutely don't need to walk away from our current one, only to build new, completely, from ground up, nearby. That would be stupid. That would be fiscally irresponsible. It would also be environmentally irresponsible.

So no. Vote a resounding no on Question 1 November 7.

We can do better than this.

We can do much better than this.

And smarter.

And it will cost far less.

VOTE NO NOVEMBER 1

I keep getting mailers with our own Mayor Sly James on them, telling me to "Vote yes November 1" on a  new, single terminal airport here in Kansas City.

To which I say:

OH HELL NO.

Reasons why:

--This new single terminal boondoggle they want, this new, shiny bauble, will cost in excess---likely far in excess---of 1 billion dollars. That's reason enough. But it goes much, much farther than that.

--They say it will bring more flights to Kansas City.

That is utter nonsense.

Since when does anyone, anyone fly to a city for their airport? That's absurd. You go for family, friends, attractions. Heck, you go for the arts first. If the Nelson-Atkins Museum built another new building, THAT would get more people here, not some silly airport.

--Few people mention that this new, single terminal will actually have LESS GATES for planes than we have available now, with our 3 terminals.  Less.  So again, why would a new airport get us more flights?

--We've actually already been getting more flights in the last few years, even with the Airport Authority up there closing down one terminal. Check out the trend.

KCI Passenger Growth Continued 

in November

KCI Airport Passenger Traffic Up 

for 13th Straight Month

Kansas City International Airport Reports 

One Million Passengers

KCI breaking records 

with one million passengers served in August

Annual passengers at KCI Airport exceed 11 million in 2016 

KCI Passengers Up 8.8 Percent in February

KCI Passengers Up Three Percent in April

KCI topped 1 million passengers in May 2017

Kansas City International Airport Reports 

Third Busiest July on Record

KCI Passengers up 6.6 Percent in November

Kansas City International Airport 

Reports 37th Consecutive Month of

 Passenger Growth

So, please, City Hall? Mayor? Kansas City Star? Everyone else? Don't give us this nonsense that "We need a new airport so we can grow" here in Kansas City. We're already growing. You guys just aren't reporting it.

---The fact is, the facts are, our airport, if it does look bad, it does so because the airport authority wants it to. I've written and said this before. They've been jonesing for a new, shiny toy in a single terminal airport FOR YEARS. And so, to get one, they've put off maintenance and overall made the place look run down and disjointed because they want us to walk away from all those buildings up there, fork over the cool one billion dollars plus it will take to get them this new toy and let them have their fun.  Yeah, no thanks.

---If you don't think we will all pay for this somehow, you are certainly kidding yourself. Those of us who fly will pay and pay dearly. Those reasonably priced tickets to get to Grandma's house or vacation or business trips or whatever will be a thing of the distant past. And it will be painful, folks, don't kid yourself. It will be expensive, very expensive and again, painful.

---There is no reason in the world, construction, cost or otherwise, we can't use Terminal B as the main access point for the airport and then construct walkways out to Terminals A and C, to get to all the rest of the flights we want and need. It would save us hundreds of millions of dollars, folks. It would be fiscally responsible, very unlike the grossly, fiscally irresponsible idea of, again, walking away from our current facilities and building all brand new, nearby.

The Star even tries scare tactics and outright lies to get us to vote for this billion dollar plus waste and boondoggle.

The existing KCI can't be made secure for a post-9/11 world

And if our current airport were updated and modernized and made more secure, as it should be, it would create jobs, construction jobs, just as the callers for a new airport would. Would it be as many jobs? No, certainly not, but we wouldn't be blowing through more than 1 billion dollars, either.

A new, single terminal airport here in Kansas City would be, I say again, fiscally and environmentally irresponsible and to huge degrees, on both issues.

People forget that, in the not-that-distant past, our airport had restaurants on the 2nd level where we could look out on the runways as flights came and went. That was back when it was newer, yes, but it was also back when the airport was well run and better run than it is now. We shouldn't forget that. It was done once--that is, run right and run well and it could be, again. We just need to demand it. It's out airport, after all. We pay for it. We keep it going.

So hell yes and hell no. This November 1, make sure you vote, first of all. And then, make damn sure you vote a clear, strong NO---HELL, NO, if you can---when it comes to the billion dollar plus boondoggle they want up North, for our airport.

And then let's get back the airport we all deserve. A well run one. A completely functioning, attractive, modern one. We can.  We can do this.

Let's all give ourselves a terrific holiday gift this year. Let's do the responsible thing. Let's do the fiscally intelligent thing. Let's do the environmentally responsible thing.

VOTE NO NOVEMBER 1.

The Great Single Airport, Billion-Plus Dollar Bamboozle

Yes sir, Kansas City.  The powers that be in the city, from the Airport Authority to City Hall to the Mayor's office to The Kansas City Star to now, heck, even George Brett have all decided we cannot and will not renovate and renew our only 40 year old airport. They and more have all decided we must, must walk away from our existing facilities, terminals and all, and build anew.

They decided this long ago.

Our Airport Authority decided it first and now they've gotten everyone else to go along with it and its successfully--for them--snowballed, ever since.

The thing is on this, besides the fact that they want us all to accept this fiscally irresponsible idea and expense but they also are, in no way, addressing who's going to pay for it or how our flight ticket prices will increase because of it all.

Forget the fact that, besides being, again, fiscally irresponsible and very expensive, very soon, once it goes through (and it will go through, rest assured), they also no way want to mention how environmentally irresponsible this is.

WE'RE GOING TO THROW AWAY MANY, MANY BUILDINGS OUT THERE.

We're going to just walk away from them.  Poof.

Then, last evening, I even saw this beauty of an article from The Star:

Editorial: Why an increase in 

airline passenger fees could actually be

 a good deal for passengers

So not only is this whole expense going to cost more than 1 billion dollars, it is also completely, totally unnecessary. The current facilities could be renovated for the security they're calling for. They won't but we should.

And now they want us to believe the inevitable increase in our passenger fees is---wait for it---GOING TO BE GOOD FOR US!!

BWAHAHAHAHAHA

If I don't laugh, I cry.

The one gain we've gotten out of this is that finally, finally The Star is acknowledging that the prices and costs for our flights are going to go up.

Small progress.

A New Kansas City Tradition Starting Around Our New Streetcars?

It seems a new tradition may well be starting here in Kansas City based on our just as new streetcars and it's another musical tradition if it takes off.

I saw this last evening on a local and my Facebook friend Eric Nielsen. He was going to the annual Memorial Day Celebration at the Station.

The streetcar is rocking with group karaoke - it was "I Will Survive" and now it's "Don't Stop Believing " . It's hilarious!

Another friend of his also wrote that there had been karaoke on the streetcar the previous night, too.

It makes me think these streetcars may well really work. It seems Kansas Citians are not only riding them but enjoying them, too.

So suck on that, haters. To all who dismiss them or hope they fail, especially bloggers who rail against them and seem to want to bring failure down on everything from the Mayor to our Royals and Chiefs and the Country Club Plaza, it seems it's a long overdue good thing, people are using them and loving them, too.

Let's hope it keeps up.

Your opinion voters? Who needs that?

KC mayor calls airport vote petition drive a 'wasted effort' 

Citizens of Kansas City and the area?  Who needs your opinion?

You're just going to be the ones paying for any new airport at KCI with higher fees to fly in and out of town.

Your vote?   Bah.

Democracy?

Fuggedaboudit!

This is a city ethics code?

City ethics code?

Are you freaking kidding me?

Reportedly, this week, our own city hall adopted what they're calling an ethics code:

New ethics code, approved Thursday, says Kansas City employees can't accept gifts worth more than $1,000.

Are you kidding me?

They can accept gifts up to $1000?

Who doesn't think our city government representatives can't be bought for $1000 or less?

Especially if, say, this month they get $1000 and then next month and the month after that, ad inifinitum?

Or $1000 this week from me and $1000 next week from my wife and another $1000 the week after that from my kid, 'cuz, you know, it's all perfectly legal, right?  Right?

I ask again--who here thinks their representative can't be bought?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Come on, guys, try a bit harder.

We know there are absolutely no limits down in Jefferson City for gifts or "campaign contributions" (don't make me laugh) but it's City Hall. You have to have more and better--read: lower--gift limits than this.

Get real.

Celebration at the Station this weekend

Celebration at the Station airs Sunday, May 26, 2013 at 8pm on KCPT. 

Located at Kansas City’s Union Station, music is by the Kansas City Symphony with Michael Stern, music director. This year  they're also featuring Oleta Adams, Musicorps and host Jim Birdsall with Charles Bruffy, chorus director.

Bank of America Celebration at the Station is the largest FREE Memorial Day Weekend event in the Midwest. The Kansas City Symphony, led by Music Director Michael Stern, performs patriotic favorites against the backdrop of Kansas City’s historic Union Station. The event concludes with their wonderful, annual fireworks display. The Kansas City Symphony is grateful to Bank of America for making this gift to our city possible.

This year's Celebration at the Station will also have a variety of food truck vendors on-site, offering a wide array of food and beverage options! Including The Moose Truck,New York Dawg Pound, Cajun Cabin, Monk's Roast Beef, Kona Ice-Trucks, Jerusalem Cafe Hookah Bar, Jazzy B's and CoffeeCakeKC.

How you can help Save KCI

We will have volunteers out this weekend at the Cosentinos and/or Price Chopper in Brookside collecting signatures if you would like to sign. 

If you would like to help and take a shift collecting signatures even better! 

To sign you must be a registered voter in Kansas City, MO. 

If you want to volunteer it doesn’t matter where you live, your help is needed and appreciated. 

To volunteer for this weekend or any other shift please contact friendsofkci@gmail.com and our volunteer coordinator will get back with you.

Conclusions you have to come to about Kyle James

Okay so, once again, Kyle James--son of Kansas City Mayor Sly James--is in jail. This above, is apparently his latest arrest photo, too.

Who cares what the reason is. (Well, other than the his parents, anyway).

With this, with him being arrested and put into jail once again, it seems easy and obvious to come to at least a few conclusions about him.

First, he must not learn lessons.

Second, he must not care a fig about his father's political career or personal reputation, let alone his own.

Third, he just can't seem to grow up, mature and take responsibility for his own life and actions.

Sad, very sad, as well as unfortunate and totally, utterly, completely unnecessary.

On Mayor James speech today

Can we now get the kind of security for the mayor of Kansas City that we ought to already have?

Thank goodness nothing more serious--or worse--happened.

Because it certainly could have.

KC in the news today

Yessir, our very own Kansas City is in the news today in a pretty cool article out on the interwebs:

9 Cities You Wouldn't Think Are Hubs for Tech Startups

What they (Entrepeneur Magazine) have to say about us, ranked number two in the list:

Why it's hot: This Midwestern city is preparing for an influx of innovation when it gets an instant tech infusion from Google Fiber, which will provide free, gigabit internet to 180 neighborhoods starting in October.

Mayor Sly James has announced Launch KC, a city-sponsored initiative to attract more startups with such enticements as cheap office space and equipment subsidies. Local companies such as Hallmark Cards are donating space to encourage entrepreneurs to try on KC for size.

Startups to watch: Sites like Kansas City Hacker Homes are popping up to link residents with innovators, but not every upstart is new here. Early-stage business incubator and startup accelerator Think Big Partners has been assisting entrepreneurs since 2008. It also invests in local startups, including Eye Verify, a biometrics software developer.

So kudos, Kansas City. Keep knocking 'em out.


Link: http://www.entrepreneur.com/slideshow/224504#2

Image credit: Foto's Office Systems

Further proof: There will be no streetcars, no convention hotel

The Star evaluates Kansas City's past, present and, really, future, given our spending and lack of leadership and vision. It's a good article, really, a great interpretation:

KC is paying a big price for falling behind

It's a good, smart, brief read:

"Kansas City’s overall outstanding government debt of $2.32 billion works out to $5,028 owed by every resident. That’s the second highest load when stacked up against 10 other peer cities (see chart on link, below).

Could the Mayor's streetcar line and the convention hotel happen?

Sure, I guess. It could. Possibly.

Is it likely?

Given the lack or weakness of leadership locally (and even nationally), I wouldn't put money on it.

Link: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/05/05/3594782/the-stars-editorial-kc-is-paying.html

Why we won't get streetcars

Yael Abouhalkah, from The Star, said it very simply and well:

"Mayor Sly James, other city officials and streetcar enthusiasts are understandably ecstatic today about a judge’s order that upholds creation of the streetcar funding district.

Yes, it’s a potentially positive step for the city and its efforts to improve KC’s pathetic mass transit situation.

But even if voters uphold formation of the transportation funding district - with higher property and sales taxes - two more things still have to happen before streetcars have a remote chance of running down the streets.

The single most important element would be federal approval for $25 million in U.S. funds to help build the line."

Face it. It's just not going to happen.

Now, the downtown hotel?

Hmmmmm.

Doubtful, at least.

Very doubtful.

Link: http://voices.kansascity.com/entries/sobering-facts-about-kcs-just-approved-streetcar-election/

KCMO water issues

An update: The two water pipe leaks on Southwest Trafficway were fixed some time ago, yes, so great. But the one at about 35th Street and that same Southwest Trafficway is still leaking and there's another at 37th,too. In the meantime, there is a rather large leak--meaning lots and lots of water running down the street--on Main Street just before 43rd as you're headed South. With the far under freezing temperatures forecast for us this Thursday, I predict we'll see at least one, if not some accidents there unless it's fixed before then, which is likely doubtful. Stay tuned. Good luck to us.