KCRag Forum

And if Jolie and sly are for it I most likely am too!

From the articles I read it sounds like there weren't anywhere near enough details about the design or the funding. You don't go forward on a billion dollar deal with a "trust us, it's going to be great". How bad would it look if this all fell apart in 9 months and we had to pay Edgemore 30 million to back out of the deal? And if I'm not mistaken, Edgemore doesn't have a large portfolio of projects this size. KCMO is in the driver's seat on this and they shouldn't expect anything other than full details to their satisfaction.

I tend to agree. The editorial from the star isn't helping public opinion. They should have been a little more tempered in their remarks...feel like they are really trying hard to become edgy and relevant again.

shinatoo wrote:From the articles I read it sounds like there weren't anywhere near enough details about the design or the funding. You don't go forward on a billion dollar deal with a "trust us, it's going to be great". How bad would it look if this all fell apart in 9 months and we had to pay Edgemore 30 million to back out of the deal? And if I'm not mistaken, Edgemore doesn't have a large portfolio of projects this size. KCMO is in the driver's seat on this and they shouldn't expect anything other than full details to their satisfaction.

Not trying to be combative, but why wouldn't these details have been worked out prior to Edgemore being selected in the first place?

kcjak wrote:

shinatoo wrote:From the articles I read it sounds like there weren't anywhere near enough details about the design or the funding. You don't go forward on a billion dollar deal with a "trust us, it's going to be great". How bad would it look if this all fell apart in 9 months and we had to pay Edgemore 30 million to back out of the deal? And if I'm not mistaken, Edgemore doesn't have a large portfolio of projects this size. KCMO is in the driver's seat on this and they shouldn't expect anything other than full details to their satisfaction.

Not trying to be combative, but why wouldn't these details have been worked out prior to Edgemore being selected in the first place?

yes, with council people on the selection committee and all...

It does appear the MOU could use more financing definition....the only thing further defined was protecting edgemoor.

You'd think we could look to other cities MOUs to see if this one was somehow inadequate.

I have a hard time believing that James, Justus, et al, would allow themselves to be put in a position to have this blow up in their faces.

KCPowercat wrote:It does appear the MOU could use more financing definition....the only thing further defined was protecting edgemoor.

Shame on the city-hired attorneys who worked on this, right?! Something appears severely out of place, whether it is a process, people, other motivations, etc. It seems rather messy at this point....

DaveKCMO wrote:while certainly a disappointment, let's remember that the council still has voter approval to tear down the old terminal(s) and build a new single terminal. today's outcome doesn't change that, it just alters the timeline and the people involved (and makes the council look bad).

The language was specific to private financing. So, doomsday scenario is that the city dumps edgemoor and can't work things out with Aecom then they would have to go back to the polls to get approval for a publicly funded option. Wowzers. Then if that were to pass, they would issue another RFP and entertain bids from interested parties who have already seen this crumble once before.

Call me a pessimist, but to me it seems like a stunt to get Burns and Mac as the leader. It doesn't seem coincidental that Jermaine, Justus, and Sly are all on the same team. They seem like the most realistic council members/mayor. I can definitely see this getting mirred up in a lawsuit. I wonder if the other council members really think they can just shove it to Burns and Mac with no one calling foul

Am I the only one that sees this as positive? We have AECOM...the 800 lb gorilla chomping at the bit to do this for us and the bandwidth to do it....and edgemoor over a barrel to give the city what they want or we move on.

Sure negotiation is ugly and kind of a gross way it showed itseof yesterday which input that on some in the council....but overall this isn't a big deal.

KCPowercat wrote:Am I the only one that sees this as positive? We have AECOM...the 800 lb gorilla chomping at the bit to do this for us and the bandwidth to do it....and edgemoor over a barrel to give the city what they want or we move on.

Sure negotiation is ugly and kind of a gross way it showed itseof yesterday which input that on some in the council....but overall this isn't a big deal.

I would like to agree with you but we don't know what AECOM's MOU will look like. Could introduce another set of issues with different council members leading us back to where we are today.

Here's my concern. These types of issues should have been known and discussed well before it approached a formal vote. This just makes our city look stupid. If you have problems with the MOU, discuss those problems with the vendor, if they refuse to resolve them (which it doesn't sound like what happened), then you say you can't vote on it and raise the issue in committee before going to the full council. This is politics 101. I agree with Sly that this is nothing more than some folks trying to get their way for political circus.

^Bingo.

I find the whole community improvement piece ridiculous. We’re paying them to build an airport, not hand out cash for pet projects. Sounds like council members didn’t get the kickback they expected and threw a fit.

cityscape wrote:Here's my concern. These types of issues should have been known and discussed well before it approached a formal vote. This just makes our city look stupid. If you have problems with the MOU, discuss those problems with the vendor, if they refuse to resolve them (which it doesn't sound like what happened), then you say you can't vote on it and raise the issue in committee before going to the full council. This is politics 101. I agree with Sly that this is nothing more than some folks trying to get their way for political circus.

Sounds like they either skipped or rushed the committee process and went straight to the full council.

https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/ed ... -agreement

Agree that most of this is posturing.

Check the city manager’s twitter feed for some interesting comments: @kcmomanager

David Hudnall gives us his perspective on the KCI MOU controversy

https://www.pitch.com/news/blog/2098657 ... ably-think

DaveKCMO wrote:Check the city manager’s twitter feed for some interesting comments: @kcmomanager

Interesting perspective that has not been reported in the media.