KCRag Forum

One school of thought is that Shields bungles up these negotiations so bad that the next executive could do a much better job.  While I don't have an opinion on Shields, would someone like Mike Sanders or some other fresh face do a better job for us if this is voted down?

It really sucks that bi-state was screwed 2 years back b/c 1/8 cent tax (w/o arts) spread across the metro is a much better deal.  I think the KS legis wanted the arts part of it so that they would ensure it wouldn't pass.  Arts is better left to each individual community to fund in my opinion, and apparently everyone agreed in 2004 except JaCo.

Yep.  I admit I haven't reviewed the entire plan but the one thing that really sticks out is how the extra-money generated (and there will be lots) will be used by the owners as they see fit rather than paying for the improvements.  Jackson County could easily pay off the improvements in a very short amount of time and be rid of this tax if it weren't for this stumbling block.  If I were a Jackson Countian I'd insist on it.  There are some Jackson Countians who can't even afford to go see a Chiefs game so the less time those people have to spend giving up some their hard earned money to pay for a luxury they can't even enjoy the better.

I don't think it would hurt to put even more of the cost burden on the people who actually go to the games (via ticket taxes) than is stated either.  It's their play ground and not everyone can afford to play in it so let them pay for it.

LS_Tiger wrote: One school of thought is that Shields bungles up these negotiations so bad that the next executive could do a much better job.  While I don't have an opinion on Shields, would someone like Mike Sanders or some other fresh face do a better job for us if this is voted down?

It really sucks that bi-state was screwed 2 years back b/c 1/8 cent tax (w/o arts) spread across the metro is a much better deal.  I think the KS legis wanted the arts part of it so that they would ensure it wouldn't pass.  Arts is better left to each individual community to fund in my opinion, and apparently everyone agreed in 2004 except JaCo.

BSII had too many problems like taxation without representation, or competent representation, that is.  It was too vague.  People would endorse a well laid out plan, BSII wasn't it and my opinion is that the April 4 vote is doomed for similar concerns.

A good, realistic plan has to be there but for some reason JaxCo cannot accurately nail down a solid plan people can truly get behind.  Creativity to fund the stadiums, like what Barnes did with the Sprint Center, is most likely the only best option.  Mix public with private money.

The trouble is the next executive will not take office until 1/1/2007.  Past the time for the county to do anything except go into default.

So wish and pray all you want to but this is it.

aknowledgeableperson wrote: but this is it.

or what? 

Oh yeah, the county legislature looses control and we can turn this over to more competent negotiators rather than the sleazeballs who negotiated this sweetheart deal for the owners. 

Almost every stadium constructed in the last decade or two has been the result of the sides going back to the table multiple times to renegotiate until they come up with a better deal for the taxpayer. 

LenexatoKCMO wrote: or what? 

Oh yeah, the county legislature looses control and we can turn this over to more competent negotiators rather than the sleazeballs who negotiated this sweetheart deal for the owners. 

Almost every stadium constructed in the last decade or two has been the result of the sides going back to the table multiple times to renegotiate until they come up with a better deal for the taxpayer. 

true, however, this is not the first try, it is the second. most new stadiums in america in the last 15 years, were 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or even 5th attempts. when minnesota and miami finally build new, they will be 4th and 5th attempts respectively, so, even if this does not pass, it is not the end of the world, since, just looking at 5 various cities, the average is 3 tries to get it passed.

however, all of you who will turn cartwheels, and dance in the streets in front of kelly's if this fails, you are wasting your time............failure only means back to the table with the royals and the county, and that full of shit jack steadman will be there at the same table, all negotiating to redo the truman sports complex.

The trouble is the next executive will not take office until 1/1/2007.  Past the time for the county to do anything except go into default.

You forgot this point.

Shields gets a lot of the blame for the failure of Bistate II.  From the very first day of planning she pissed off the suburban mayors in both states.  At every step along the way where she had an opportunity to get Joco buy-in and cooperation she chose the confrontational, secretive route. 

It was a terrible job of diplomacy in what was a very sensitive political situation.  It was doomed from the beginning because there was no genuine attempt to get support outside of the Chamber of Commerce.

What kind of negotiating is there about the stadiums?  Politicians will give anyone any amount of money as long as they get campaign contributions in exchange and they can sell it to the voters.  There will never be an arms length negotiation with the owners as long as local officials represent the taxpayers.

Hunt would kick in twice the amount he now offers before even looking at a move.  Glass would not kick in money but he would never move as long as the stadium remains functionable.  Forget about defaults and all that bullshit, this is about Lamar Hunt buying off a bunch of corrupt morons who run Jackson County.

aknowledgeableperson wrote: The trouble is the next executive will not take office until 1/1/2007.  Past the time for the county to do anything except go into default.

You forgot this point.

I didn't forget anything - thats the best part!  When this fails; it no longer has to be done through the Jackson County Legislature.  You couldn't ask for a better outcome than that.  A deal can then be negotiated from the stance of an assertive voting public, rather than the stance of a bunch of desperate sleazeballs who would do anything to maintain their own bungled authority over the TSC.  It doesn't take a genious to figure out which scenario produces a better deal. 

LenexatoKCMO wrote: I didn't forget anything - thats the best part!  When this fails; it no longer has to be done through the Jackson County Legislature.  You couldn't ask for a better outcome than that.  A deal can then be negotiated from the stance of an assertive voting public, rather than the stance of a bunch of desperate sleazeballs who would do anything to maintain their own bungled authority over the TSC.  It doesn't take a genious to figure out which scenario produces a better deal. 

but again ~you think letting the leases default is the best option, the option that exposes BOTH teams to being able to leave. that is not a doomsday scenario. that is a simple fact.

BFD. Teams that leave always threaten to leave first. No team in KC has done that.

kcdcchef wrote: but again ~you think letting the leases default is the best option, the option that exposes BOTH teams to being able to leave. that is not a doomsday scenario. that is a simple fact.

Yeah, but they probably won't leave. It is extremely risky from a business standpoint to pack up and leave, especially for the Chiefs. We must be careful to not get so worked up over the implied and overblown threat of them leaving that we as taxpayers make bad decisions that are not in our best interest. You're right, it isn't a doomsday scenario--the leases defaulting is still most likely a winning scenario for the taxpayer.

KCMax wrote: BFD. Teams that leave always threaten to leave first. No team in KC has done that.

yeah, because we all know it is in the best intrest of kansas city to wait til they start flaunting that. good idea.

LenexatoKCMO wrote: I didn't forget anything - thats the best part!  When this fails; it no longer has to be done through the Jackson County Legislature.  You couldn't ask for a better outcome than that.  A deal can then be negotiated from the stance of an assertive voting public, rather than the stance of a bunch of desperate sleazeballs who would do anything to maintain their own bungled authority over the TSC.  It doesn't take a genious to figure out which scenario produces a better deal. 

You are way, way out there.  Jackson County will still have TSC with leases in default.  That is a place of weakness, it puts us on our knees begging for them to stay.  They have all of the cards.  They can take it or leave it.

Guess you have never negotiated.

aknowledgeableperson wrote: That is a place of weakness, it puts us on our knees begging for them to stay.  They have all of the cards.  They can take it or leave it.

I think this is the fundamental misperception here. You never get on your knees and beg for them to stay. That is the ultimate place of weakness. Guess you've never negotiated. The problem is, the county never negotiated either.

mean wrote: I think this is the fundamental misperception here. You never get on your knees and beg for them to stay. That is the ultimate place of weakness. Guess you've never negotiated. The problem is, the county never negotiated either.

Exactly...& 2 other things that never seem to be mentioned :

1. The teams don't exactly have tons of options in terms of out-of-town places to move to - despite what the saveourstadiums.com goons would have you believe.

2. If the Chiefs left, the NFL would have another team in here ASAP.

DiggityDawg wrote: Exactly...& 2 other things that never seem to be mentioned :

1. The teams don't exactly have tons of options in terms of out-of-town places to move to - despite what the saveourstadiums.com goons would have you believe.

2. If the Chiefs left, the NFL would have another team in here ASAP.

diggitydawg, if this city loses a team due to their own ignorance, the nfl will be in no hurry to fill the void. the second largest tv market in america has been without the nfl for a decade now, i do not see any poste haste for them. baltimore went without for 16 years, and, got a new one by publicly financing a new stadium.

the nfl, will not forget that we lost our team, when, we had a chance to keep them. if we lose the chiefs, or the royals, these dreams you guys have of a new team will be here in a matter of minutes, or years, is crazy. professional sports can be unforgiving, and we have already lost 3 franchises in kc. if that number grows to 4 or even 5, good luck ever getting replacements.

If this city loses a team it won't be due to ignorance, it will hopefully be due to them making educated and rational decisions, instead of irrational emotional ones.

Anyway, Kansas City is a rabid football town. Even if Hunt was a daft enough businessman to risk moving the Chiefs (which I'm quite certain he isn't) the NFL and some rich owner would see the dollar signs before long.

mean wrote: I think this is the fundamental misperception here. You never get on your knees and beg for them to stay. That is the ultimate place of weakness. Guess you've never negotiated. The problem is, the county never negotiated either.

When the county is in default then the teams have options, we do not. 
Options for the Chiefs and/or Royals in metro areas larger than KC:  Los Angeles, Portland, Sacramento.
Options for the Chiefs and/or Royals in metro areas smaller than KC but growing faster than KC: Orlando, San Antonio, Las Vegas, Charlotte, Salt Lake City, Austin.

Negotiated many times, just not with sports teams.