We need a new airport!!!

[WoodDraw]

Lack of renderings doesn't bother me at all as long as they have everything ready to campaign on.

I'm a little worried that the local business community might not be as engaged in the election though without Burns and Mac. I expect a full on lobbying spray starting now.

[KC_JAYHAWK]

Lack of renderings doesn't bother me at all as long as they have everything ready to campaign on.

I'm a little worried that the local business community might not be as engaged in the election though without Burns and Mac. I expect a full on lobbying spray starting now.

Yes, so much for their constant adds about keeping jobs local It was going to be an uphill battle with B&M, JEDunn and Americo team, but now you pull out all local companies?

[KCPowercat]

This will pass 60%. Locals will still be the ones employed on this job and that's what the unions will turn out the vote for.

[cityscape]

This will pass 60%. Locals will still be the ones employed on this job and that's what the unions will turn out the vote for.

What about all of the subcontractors that signed an exclusivity agreement with B&M? Will Clarkson be able to find enough local subs?

[horizons82]

Yes, so much for their constant adds about keeping jobs local It was going to be an uphill battle with B&M, JEDunn and Americo team, but now you pull out all local companies?

IMO, shame on B&M not the city for hampering the PR effort. They forced all sorts of local subs to sign non-competes leaving little for the other teams to pitch with. Plus their ads, for those not in construction or design, would lead you to believe they had some sort magical pool of local labor that nobody else can pull from. Total BS.

Clarkson has plenty of respect and knowledge of the community. They seem to win just about every major JoCo infrastructure project. And Edgemoor is overseeing KU's huge central district project, so they're not completely foreign.

I was also wondering who would be the AOR...SOM is pretty great. Their website seems to list only a portion of all their aviation work, but I'm excited to see what they propose.

[WoodDraw]

Yes, so much for their constant adds about keeping jobs local It was going to be an uphill battle with B&M, JEDunn and Americo team, but now you pull out all local companies?

IMO, shame on B&M not the city for hampering the PR effort. They forced all sorts of local subs to sign non-competes leaving little for the other teams to pitch with. Plus their ads, for those not in construction or design, would lead you to believe they had some sort magical pool of local labor that nobody else can pull from. Total BS.

Clarkson has plenty of respect and knowledge of the community. They seem to win just about every major JoCo infrastructure project. And Edgemoor is overseeing KU's huge central district project, so they're not completely foreign.

I was also wondering who would be the AOR...SOM is pretty great. Their website seems to list only a portion of all their aviation work, but I'm excited to see what they propose.

I second this. I have no problem with a competitive bid, and we'll still see plenty of local jobs. Maybe even get a local office out of it.

I just want to learn more about the bid so that I feel comfortable. But I see nothing that throws me off right away. I little worried that they were the low bid, but also they're taking less profit apparently. We just need more information.

[KCPowercat]

This will pass 60%. Locals will still be the ones employed on this job and that's what the unions will turn out the vote for.

What about all of the subcontractors that signed an exclusivity agreement with B&M? Will Clarkson be able to find enough local subs?

dumbass on them.

[KC_JAYHAWK]

I was referring to the "casual" user of the terminal that like it the way it is, but would vote Yes for a new terminal knowing it was being designed, developed and built by primarily local firms that understand what is best for us, as a city. It will be a hard pitch to convince these people that an east coast company has their best interests in mind, therefore, I think it will get shot down.

[WoodDraw]

I was referring to the "casual" user of the terminal that like it the way it is, but would vote Yes for a new terminal knowing it was being designed, developed and built by primarily local firms that understand what is best for us, as a city. It will be a hard pitch to convince these people that an east coast company has their best interests in mind, therefore, I think it will get shot down.

I'm not convinced those voters exist, and this will be a local campaign. The big "if" is litigation and if any big names actively comes out against it, but that can backfire in big ways.

[WoodDraw]

Finally, the original proposal from Burns & McDonnell anticipated an annual cost of up to $85 million, paid for by airport users. Wednesday, the city said all the final bids came in at roughly $74.3 million a year.

This is pretty damning for Burns & McDonnell. They messed this up from the beginning, but it might work out for Kansas City anyway.

[missingkc]

Why is an election necessary? Is it state law because bonds will be sold? Or is it because of a promise made by a former council? Or something else?

[WoodDraw]

Why is an election necessary? Is it state law because bonds will be sold? Or is it because of a promise made by a former council? Or something else?

I think it's a complication of a lot of issues. CFRG being completely against it, the expectation early on that it would be done through airport bonds, the expectation that this will produce litigation from multiple sides, trying to avoid earlier litigation/ballot issues while the city was focused on the GO bonds, and just a desire to be done with it.

I've been critical of the process, but I think right now you have to have an open vote. Anything less would be a PR disaster now. It's a sunk cost.

[kboish]

Finally, the original proposal from Burns & McDonnell anticipated an annual cost of up to $85 million, paid for by airport users. Wednesday, the city said all the final bids came in at roughly $74.3 million a year.

This is pretty damning for Burns & McDonnell. They messed this up from the beginning, but it might work out for Kansas City anyway.

The $86 million dollar figure came from the airlines as a max price. B&M tried to swoop in and say, sure we'll build it for that.

One of many ways they ended up screwing themselves over, apparently.

As you say though... Too bad for them, we still get a new airport.

[pash]

.

[beautyfromashes]

Got greedy, paid the price.

[KCPowercat]

I was referring to the "casual" user of the terminal that like it the way it is, but would vote Yes for a new terminal knowing it was being designed, developed and built by primarily local firms that understand what is best for us, as a city. It will be a hard pitch to convince these people that an east coast company has their best interests in mind, therefore, I think it will get shot down.

If there was some sort of organized objection campaign against this I guess I could see them using the "east coast doesn't care about you" angle but I don't see that happening or many people falling for that. Obviously people will want to see at least preliminary rendering/plan before they vote...and I'm guessing SOM can whip that out in a weekend.

[KC_JAYHAWK]

We all have our own opinions and thoughts and that's great, but I think the committee just shot themselves in the foot. There may not be organized opposition, but we've all seen the polling results and this won't help sway those that want to save KCI or were on the fence. I'm guessing in October when polling starts again, the outcome will be even worse.

Remember, the city dropped the airport promotion process and came out and said, we need local businesses to push this endeavor. That's exactly what B&M did, along with Americo and JE Dunn. The City basically gave them an F U and went with the lowest bidder.

[horizons82]

The City basically gave them an F U and went with the lowest bidder.

Welcome to the world of bidding. B&M and JE Dunn knew what they were getting themselves into.

And honestly, city and all other factors aside, if Southwest said they wanted Edgemoor, the city was going to give them edgemoor.

[cityscape]

Right, but Southwest and the airlines said they preferred B&M.

[WoodDraw]

Right, but Southwest and the airlines said they preferred B&M.

Did they really though? Or were they just assuming like all of us that B&M would get it?

There were also a few stories about all the airlines not being behind that statement and Southwest possibly changing its mind. I don't think the city would be dumb enough to go forward without support of the airlines though. That is one thing that likely would doom the vote.