One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
-
- City Center Square
- Posts: 11284
- Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm
One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
It is completely unfair that Jackson County must wholly subsidize teams that serve the entire metropolitan complex. Where else in the country is one county out of at least 6 metro counties responsible for that big of an investment?
The "teams will leave" thing was just a red herring to get the uneducated voter out of his/her house. So now Jackson County will end up with the tab as everyone from Olathe to Liberty laughs their asses off. I bet the KS side breathed a big sigh of relief when they found out they would continue to be in the clear when it comes to paying their fair share. But you can't blame them...blame the dimwitted leadership in Jackson County and the equally dimwitted Jackson County voter who choose to absolve every other county in paying for one of the most expensive metro attractions.
The "teams will leave" thing was just a red herring to get the uneducated voter out of his/her house. So now Jackson County will end up with the tab as everyone from Olathe to Liberty laughs their asses off. I bet the KS side breathed a big sigh of relief when they found out they would continue to be in the clear when it comes to paying their fair share. But you can't blame them...blame the dimwitted leadership in Jackson County and the equally dimwitted Jackson County voter who choose to absolve every other county in paying for one of the most expensive metro attractions.
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
Guess what?
YOU LOST!
YOU LOST!
- kard
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 5627
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 12:37 pm
- Location: Kingdom of Waldo
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
How old are you again?
Haikus are easy
But sometimes they don't make sense
Refrigerator
But sometimes they don't make sense
Refrigerator
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
Is that really your business? I am getting very close to when I can vote, register for the draft, buy most weapons/ammo, etc... I'm more mature than most people my age, so don't try to even bash me age wise.
I just feel that all people are doing now is crying because they lost. You were all SOOOO sure you were going to win and that you were going to get a Downtown stadium... All the idiots who wanted it to fail would have done is kicked the Chiefs and Royals out of Jackson County, risking the move of both teams and causing economic instability in our area.
Or they would have succeeded in continuing to kill Downtown KCK and allowing the Chiefs to move to one of the worst parts of the metro for development. (2nd to only College Boulevard)
Not to mention that voting no would have insured that KC would never ever receive the Super Bowl... Most of the idiots on this forum don't realize how big the Super Bowl is. At least we are assured the All Star Game.
I just feel that all people are doing now is crying because they lost. You were all SOOOO sure you were going to win and that you were going to get a Downtown stadium... All the idiots who wanted it to fail would have done is kicked the Chiefs and Royals out of Jackson County, risking the move of both teams and causing economic instability in our area.
Or they would have succeeded in continuing to kill Downtown KCK and allowing the Chiefs to move to one of the worst parts of the metro for development. (2nd to only College Boulevard)
Not to mention that voting no would have insured that KC would never ever receive the Super Bowl... Most of the idiots on this forum don't realize how big the Super Bowl is. At least we are assured the All Star Game.
Last edited by KCDevin on Thu Apr 06, 2006 7:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
- kard
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 5627
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 12:37 pm
- Location: Kingdom of Waldo
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
You posted a picture of a "WAAAAAMBULANCE". Very mature--what are you, 12? (that's a figure of speech--I don't care how old you are). You're a sore winner. Get over it.KCDevin wrote: I'm more mature than most people my age, so don't try to even bash me age wise.
Trailer Kid has a excellent point that you didn't even bother to read.
1) Please read his comment, and explain to us how it's fair that one county pay this tax. And don't give me that bullshit about how "30%" from outside will pay it--if that makes sense then why not have all counties in the metro pay it?
2) I also don't understand your desire to keep the Chiefs in Jackson County. I've asked you to quality this point before, and you haven't. What is wrong with the Chiefs moving to Johnson or Wyandotte Counties? It's a very large expense to pay for stadiums. And as others have pointed out, if there was development around TSC, then tax revenue from that development would help Jackson County. Instead, people drive elsewhere (Clay, Johnson, Wyandotte, etc) for pre and after game dining. The benefit is spread out over the entire metro. The entire metro should chip in instead of only one county--the most gullible. Dispute that.
Haikus are easy
But sometimes they don't make sense
Refrigerator
But sometimes they don't make sense
Refrigerator
-
- Bryant Building
- Posts: 4209
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:25 am
- Location: brookside
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
Excellent. Maybe you should do this and head over to Iraq. Many of your ideas seem to align with those of Middle Eastern governments.KCDevin wrote: register for the draft
- KCMax
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 24051
- Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
- Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
- Contact:
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
I think this is the norm rather than the exception. What instances can you name of a county paying for something not within its borders? I'm sure there are some, but they seem to be much rarer. Most sports stadiums seem to be funded by only the county it resides in, unless I'm mistaken.
- StL_Dan
- Bryant Building
- Posts: 3661
- Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 3:04 pm
- Location: Olathe via St Louis
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
You're right, JoCoutians cannot be blamed. Why? Because they know better than to pay for something that the Chiefs and Royals ownership should pay the majority of, that's why.trailerkid wrote: It is completely unfair that Jackson County must wholly subsidize teams that serve the entire metropolitan complex. Where else in the country is one county out of at least 6 metro counties responsible for that big of an investment?
The "teams will leave" thing was just a red herring to get the uneducated voter out of his/her house. So now Jackson County will end up with the tab as everyone from Olathe to Liberty laughs their asses off. I bet the KS side breathed a big sigh of relief when they found out they would continue to be in the clear when it comes to paying their fair share. But you can't blame them...blame the dimwitted leadership in Jackson County and the equally dimwitted Jackson County voter who choose to absolve every other county in paying for one of the most expensive metro attractions.
JackCo residents have noone to blame but themselves for caving in to irrational fear tactics by the teams and the media.
One State. One Spirit. One Mizzou. 05.22.2011 RIP Rusty, Harli and Hayze
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
Great Post TK and thanks.
-
- Strip mall
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 6:59 pm
- Location: Old Hyde Park
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
Dallas County was the only county to pay a portion of the cost to renovating the new development Victory, and for building American Airlines Center.trailerkid wrote: It is completely unfair that Jackson County must wholly subsidize teams that serve the entire metropolitan complex. Where else in the country is one county out of at least 6 metro counties responsible for that big of an investment?
It's indeed a red herring. And hell, for all I care, if they want to resort to extortion to get what they want, they CAN leave. There are far better solution than renovation, but apparently, people don't believe (or want to believe) that reinvesting in an area which has been worthless the past 25 years is a bad idea.The "teams will leave" thing was just a red herring to get the uneducated voter out of his/her house. So now Jackson County will end up with the tab as everyone from Olathe to Liberty laughs their asses off. I bet the KS side breathed a big sigh of relief when they found out they would continue to be in the clear when it comes to paying their fair share. But you can't blame them...blame the dimwitted leadership in Jackson County and the equally dimwitted Jackson County voter who choose to absolve every other county in paying for one of the most expensive metro attractions.
-
- Ambassador
- Posts: 7456
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
So death threats are now OK on this board?&KCDevin wrote: Is that really your business? I am getting very close to when I can vote, register for the draft, buy most weapons/ammo, etc... I'm more mature than most people my age, so don't try to even bash me age wise.
I just feel that all people are doing now is crying because they lost. You were all SOOOO sure you were going to win and that you were going to get a Downtown stadium... All the idiots who wanted it to fail would have done is kicked the Chiefs and Royals out of Jackson County, risking the move of both teams and causing economic instability in our area.
Or they would have succeeded in continuing to kill Downtown KCK and allowing the Chiefs to move to one of the worst parts of the metro for development. (2nd to only College Boulevard)
Not to mention that voting no would have insured that KC would never ever receive the Super Bowl... Most of the idiots on this forum don't realize how big the Super Bowl is. At least we are assured the All Star Game.
- Slappy the Wang
- Valencia Place
- Posts: 1735
- Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 5:30 pm
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
I may have mentioned this in another thread, sorry for the repeat if I have...
I'm not sure how the location of the TSC was determined, but presumably there was some degree of intense site selection or bidding war. Jackson County won. As such, and as "the winner," Jackson County also "won" the sole responsibility of upkeep and maintenance.
Look at it this way......If KCK/WyCo owned the Speedway (which it doesn't) and established a long term lease with ISC and NASCAR, would anyone outside WyCo be willing to pony up to help fund the associated costs 25 years later?
I'm not sure how the location of the TSC was determined, but presumably there was some degree of intense site selection or bidding war. Jackson County won. As such, and as "the winner," Jackson County also "won" the sole responsibility of upkeep and maintenance.
Look at it this way......If KCK/WyCo owned the Speedway (which it doesn't) and established a long term lease with ISC and NASCAR, would anyone outside WyCo be willing to pony up to help fund the associated costs 25 years later?
Be green or go Broke Tryin'
- kard
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 5627
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2006 12:37 pm
- Location: Kingdom of Waldo
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
That's true, but things change in 25 years. 25 years ago the demographics of the wealth in the metro has shifted signifigatly. Admittingly--it's also why teams leave town for other cities. One city may not grow as fast or decline compared to others. It's always good to re-evaluate things now and then.
In your hypothetical situation, if in 2036 NASCAR threatened to leave the metro then, IMO, hell yes--Jackson County (and everyone else) should ante up and contribute to the incentive package to keep them here.
In your hypothetical situation, if in 2036 NASCAR threatened to leave the metro then, IMO, hell yes--Jackson County (and everyone else) should ante up and contribute to the incentive package to keep them here.
Haikus are easy
But sometimes they don't make sense
Refrigerator
But sometimes they don't make sense
Refrigerator
- Highlander
- City Center Square
- Posts: 10225
- Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
- Location: Houston
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
I believe Jackson County was kind of backed into a corner on this issue. There is no way that Jackson County or KCMO should be continuously shouldering the burden of the entire metro area when it comes to public financing of major assets. This is very problematic for KC, especially since the higher income and higher grossing retail sites (for sales tax generation) are outside of KCMO for the most part. Bistate initiatives need to become a rule ..... not an exception in the future. Additionally, bistate votes need to be kept simple: one issue at a time. The stadium renovation would have most likely passed last time had it not included funds for ancillary items. Laws requiring that bistate not be entirely sport related need to be abolished to simplify the process. Quite frankly, I think JoCo would support a lot of venues in KC if they were tackled one issue at a time. For instance, a zoo improvement would probably receive widespread support in JoCo as would have a stadium-alone tax (without all the appendages that accompanied it last time). Counties like Dallas can afford to go it alone because they have 2.2 million people and many higher income residential areas and viable retail areas; KC needs its metro area involved to be a truly great city.
-
- Bryant Building
- Posts: 4209
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:25 am
- Location: brookside
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
Bi-state will never be the norm. Not in our lifetimes. JoCo has a great deal going right now, getting big city ammenities for little cost. Can you blame them for taking advantage of it?
On top of that, there is widespread distrust by Kansans of the governments in KCMO and Jackson County. Again, can you blame them? I think Jackson County has proven itself again to be inept and not looking out for what is best for its citizens. If they had, we'd have never come to this point with the stadiums.
On top of that, there is widespread distrust by Kansans of the governments in KCMO and Jackson County. Again, can you blame them? I think Jackson County has proven itself again to be inept and not looking out for what is best for its citizens. If they had, we'd have never come to this point with the stadiums.
- StL_Dan
- Bryant Building
- Posts: 3661
- Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 3:04 pm
- Location: Olathe via St Louis
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
Common sense should indicate that comment wasn't a threat.shinatoo wrote: So death threats are now OK on this board?&
One State. One Spirit. One Mizzou. 05.22.2011 RIP Rusty, Harli and Hayze
-
- City Center Square
- Posts: 11284
- Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
KCMO (jack co., platte, clay) also solely paid for the Sprint Center which I don't see a huge problem with. I think it is different to ask this area to again pay for not one, but two professional stadiums. It's not my choice, but its unfair for the people of Jackson County considering how wealth and populatin is spread in theis metropolitan region.ReutherMonkey wrote: Dallas County was the only county to pay a portion of the cost to renovating the new development Victory, and for building American Airlines Center.It's indeed a red herring. And hell, for all I care, if they want to resort to extortion to get what they want, they CAN leave. There are far better solution than renovation, but apparently, people don't believe (or want to believe) that reinvesting in an area which has been worthless the past 25 years is a bad idea.
-
- The Quiet Chair
- Posts: 8804
- Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:48 pm
- Location: pittsburgh, pennsylvania
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
it is in other metro areas. new york/new jersey comes to mind. toronto/niagra falls comes to mind.lock&load wrote: Bi-state will never be the norm.
MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!!
-
- Bryant Building
- Posts: 4209
- Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:25 am
- Location: brookside
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
This is not either of those areas. Exactly what is going to persuade JoCo to change it's attitude? It is getting what it wants at little to no cost.kcdcchef wrote: it is in other metro areas. new york/new jersey comes to mind. toronto/niagra falls comes to mind.
- KCMax
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 24051
- Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
- Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
- Contact:
Re: One really good reason voters should've rejected the stadium tax
I'd like to read some examples of bi-state projects in other states. I want to know why suburbs in other areas feel compelled to pay up. Right now there is no incentive for JoCo to do so, so how can we get them to?