Question 1

Post by **bahua** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:15 pm

Yeah, so, what are we holding onto?

kcdcchef · Post by **kcdcchef** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:17 pm

bahua wrote: Yeah, so, what are we holding onto?

kc fans have always been fairweather. they still love the royals, just dont know how to show it.

AllThingsKC · Post by **AllThingsKC** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:20 pm

bahua wrote: Yeah, so, what are we holding onto?

I think we're holding on to the fact that we still want KC to stay "major league." I know some people who will only go to a Royals games when they start winning (I am not one of those people). But, those same people say "Well, it's nice to know we have a team, at least." I think that is the typical KC attitude, "We will support you if you win, but if you lose, we do not want you to leave the metro!"

lock+load · Post by **lock+load** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:39 pm

AllThingsKC wrote: I think we're holding on to the fact that we still want KC to stay "major league."

Are we "major league" if we cannot draw more than 10,000 to a game on many weeknights? I am quite tired of this "major league" label being thrown around. Is a city major league purely by being the home of a professional sports team, no matter how successful they are, no matter how many fans actually show up, even if the rest of the city is falling apart?

AllThingsKC · Post by **AllThingsKC** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:44 pm

How often do the Royals have LESS than 10,000 at a game? Over the years, I have tried to keep up with the Royal attendance figures, and I have only seen it below 10,000 2 or 3 times...each time had to do with winter weather/severe weather. I have, however, seen them get below 11,000 maybe...20 or 30 times over the years. But, they are normally over 13,000 on week nights, if I remember correctly. Yes, there is not a big difference between 7k and 13k, but my point is I have rarely seen them below 10,000.

lock+load · Post by **lock+load** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:47 pm

AllThingsKC wrote: How often do the Royals have LESS than 10,000 at a game? Over the years, I have tried to keep up with the Royal attendance figures, and I have only seen it below 10,000 2 or 3 times...each time had to do with winter weather/severe weather. I have, however, seen them get below 11,000 maybe...20 or 30 times over the years. But, they are normally over 13,000 on week nights, if I remember correctly. Yes, there is not a big difference between 7k and 13k, but my point is I have rarely seen them below 10,000.

Go back and look at the weeknight attendace figures the last couple months of 2005. It was not pretty.

Post by **kard** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:50 pm

Highlander wrote: Read the Star today. Other cities are watching this vote closely and positioning themselves to take the Royals (and the Chiefs for that matter) if this vote fails. Contraction just will not happen. Demand for the product is just too great. In spite of all the objections put forth about there being nowhere else for our teams to go, the reality is that KC's competetion will pay and do whatever it takes to wrestle the Royals away from the area if they think there is half a chance and already looking at ways to do this. If the stadium vote fails, the competition for the Royals will not be between KC and a host of wanna-be's but between Las Vegas, San Antonio, Portland, Charlotte etc... KC will be out of the equation.

If you are voting no in hopes of an eventual downtown stadium, then you're just not being realistic about the situation (I would love to see a DT stadium by the way but I believe the intransigence of the cities population makes it a moot point). If you are voting no because you are against "corporate welfare", then so be it, but prepare yourself for no baseball in KC; there are plenty of cities out there that want to be major league and are willing to pay for it regardless of how much the owners contribute.

I was finally able to read DeAnne Smith article on A12 today. Thanks, KCStar, for what I was wanting a long time ago: An objective look at the most likely scenarios. I hope people get a chance to read this. I had to dig to find it online...here's a link.

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 187453.htm

Post by **KCMax** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 1:59 pm

You can't honestly tell me that should this vote fail, and the teams expressly indicate their willingness to move, that Jackson County Legislators won't put together another package and it will sail through the next time???? People aren't voting YES because there is NO EXPRESS WILLINGESS by the teams to move. If they throw down the hammer, hell, I'll even vote for this stupid monstrosity.

We will be in danger of losing the teams by voting no, but we'll still be in the running to keep them, and we'd probably be the favorites. They want to stay here, and will only move if they get an offer they cannot refuse. Relocating a franchise is a long process (particularly in baseball, it only took the Expos what, 5-8 years to relocate?)

AllThingsKC · Post by **AllThingsKC** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 2:08 pm

KCMax wrote: You can't honestly tell me that should this vote fail, and the teams expressly indicate their willingness to move, that Jackson County Legislators won't put together another package and it will sail through the next time????

I agree with everything you said, KCMax, except for this line. Here's why (from the article):

County officials say they would not have enough time to pull off an August or November election, collect money for construction and then get required projects completed before the Dec. 31 deadline. Without the April election, the county will default at the end of the year, allowing the teams next year to start looking for new locations.

lock+load · Post by **lock+load** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 2:13 pm

Let the Royals leave. Everyone will be upset, and motivated to get a DT ballpark done. Then we can steal the Marlins

Post by **KCMax** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 2:17 pm

Right, they would START looking, but it would take at least a year for them to move. If this vote fails, we'd have just as much time as San Antonio, Portland or Charlotte to put together a package. Perhaps it puts us in a worse situation than we are in now, but that's a risk I'm willing to take. I really don't think either team has any intention of moving out of the metro area at all.

AllThingsKC · Post by **AllThingsKC** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 2:18 pm

lock&load wrote: Let the Royals leave.

I don't want to!!!

lock&load wrote:Everyone will be upset,

You got that right!!!

lock&load wrote:...and motivated to get a DT ballpark done.

WHAT? Do you really think people will be talking about a DT ballpark....WITH NO TEAM???? Great idea!

lock&load wrote:Then we can steal the Marlins

This IS a good idea, but what scares me about this is the fact that we're not sure if it will happen.

Post by **kard** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 2:21 pm

This was an interesting quote from DeAnn's article today, towards the end:

[quote="DeAnn Smith, KC Star, Sunday March 26 -- "WHAT IF?""]Although more than half of the big-league baseball teams have threatened to leave in the last 30 years, since 1972 only one has actually moved â€” the Montreal Expos to Washington, D.C.[/quote]

lock+load · Post by **lock+load** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 2:21 pm

AllThingsKC wrote: Do you really think people will be talking about a DT ballpark....WITH NO TEAM????

This IS a good idea, but what scares me about this is the fact that we're not sure if it will happen.

The TSC was developed in this manner, before we had the Royals.

No risk=no reward. If you are content with the same old thing forever (crappy location, taxpayers getting screwed) then go for it. If you'd like better, take a risk and go for it.

Post by **bahua** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 2:24 pm

lock&load wrote: The TSC was developed in this manner, before we had the Royals.

No risk=no reward. If you are content with the same old thing forever (crappy location, taxpayers getting screwed) then go for it. If you'd like better, take a risk and go for it.

I can think of an arena that's under construction right now, with that same idea.

Highlander · Post by **Highlander** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:18 pm

lock&load wrote: The TSC was developed in this manner, before we had the Royals.

The problem with that logic is that now you are indeed stuck with paying for not most of the stadium, but all of it and with no guarantee of a tenant

aknowledgeableperson · Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:55 pm

Of course, an arena has nore uses than for just one sports team. A stadium on the other hand................
Is empty without a team.

ShowME · Post by **ShowME** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 9:51 pm

Let the Royals leave. Everyone will be upset, and motivated to get a DT ballpark done. Then we can steal the Marlins

Totally agree. Why do we want baseball in the middle of nowhere when we can create an atmosphere downtown and get a better return on investment and why do we want an owner who believes in this BS. It's not acceptable to screw the lower class in order support Mr. Glass. I'd rather them leave and try to lure another franchise in a new downtown ballpark.

kcdcchef · Post by **kcdcchef** » Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:03 am

lock&load wrote: The TSC was developed in this manner, before we had the Royals.

.

the tsc was voted on by jackson countians knowing we had the chiefs and the royals. in 1967, when it was voted on, the american league told kansas city we would have an expansion franchise in 1969, but, we had to get a new stadium, and lose municipal. the vote was 75% yes for the financing. so, we had 2 teams when we voted yes.

ShowME wrote: Totally agree. Why do we want baseball in the middle of nowhere when we can create an atmosphere downtown and get a better return on investment and why do we want an owner who believes in this BS. It's not acceptable to screw the lower class in order support Mr. Glass. I'd rather them leave and try to lure another franchise in a new downtown ballpark.

this is a SMALL town, if we lose a 2nd baseball team, we are not getting a 3rd. never happening.

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:09 am

No one is going to come to KC with another baseball francise if the Royals ever leave... Lose two teams, plus the fact that we aren't a big baseball market. Say goodbye to MLB, unless you want to root for the ST LOUIS Cardinals.

I just hope our voters aren't so greedy they can't pass a minor tax like this. They think about themselves and their own pockets before the community at large...

Don't say your waiting for a better plan, because this is plan D! This is the last chance! If this doesn't pass, the Chiefs will either leave KC alltogether or leave Missouri. The Royals will completely leave the city and never come back. Downtown baseball just isn't going to happen unless you lure Minor League Baseball here.

KCRag Forum

Question 1

Shall the County of Jackson impose a countywide sales tax at the rate of three-eighths of one percent (3/8%) for a period of twenty-five years from the date on which such tax is first imposed for the purpose of improving, renovating and modernizing the Ha

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1

Re: Question 1