KCRag Forum

That is one perfect nickname. Hope you don't mind if I use that from now on.

grovester wrote:
Too bad the election data will be tainted by Chastain's involvement.

I understand people automatically voting against anything backed by Chastain. The guy is ridiculous. But, if this produces a city-wide funding source for transportation that the council can modify based on costs and desires, why would this note be worth voting for? The piecemeal TDD plan shouldn't be the ultimate way that we fund transportation in a major city.

KCPowercat wrote:St. Louis built in a way different time with a lot of federal money available....and traffic problems that spurred people to want other options.

The capital cost to build the initial phase of MetroLink was $465 million. Of that amount, $348 million was supplied by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MetroLink_(St._Louis)

i think that the 24 mile "clayton" extension was substantially funded by local money but i can't recall...

it took about 9 years from concept (or deciding route, anyway) by the east-west council to operation.

question numbers for august 8, should you decide to vote yes on chastain (and for understanding what might happen with turnout, given what's actually on the ballot -- nothing but citywide petition initiatives):

Q1 - DeJanes anti-streetcar
Q2 - Chastain
Q3 - minimum wage

https://www.kceb.org/useruploads/Sample ... ebsite.pdf

As dirty as it makes me feel, I think I'm going to be a yes on Q2.

Question 1 seams like it wouldn't hold up against the TDD. Not sure what they are trying to accomplish.

shinatoo wrote:Question 1 seams like it wouldn't hold up against the TDD. Not sure what they are trying to accomplish.

It seems like it's prima facie unconstitutional. What they are trying to accomplish is to create a mechanism to tie up the streetcar expansion vote in the courts, because they don't think they will win the TDD vote.

shinatoo wrote:Question 1 seams like it wouldn't hold up against the TDD. Not sure what they are trying to accomplish.

It will be thrown out in a second because of a critical error. read this post.
The point on unconstitutional is true, I bet the commerce clause will be cited

http://kcrag.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=19 ... 80#p562612

please chime in when you receive your ballots!

http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/kc ... 96359.html

Received my ballot today

Got mine too.

Just checked my mail and mine was there too!

Received!

Got mine today.

Yup.

Ours too! Can anyone provide info on where to get your signature notarized? I haven't had to do that in forever.

Dave will hold notarizing events I'm sure. Your bank will also do it and I believe are required to do it for free for ballots

Washington and Oregon have vote by mail by default and apparently no notary needed. Is there a reason to require notary? WA/OR don't appear to have any complaints of abuse. Wish MO would go all in with vote by mail by default. The 'turnout' for small elections tends to be about the same for the big ones.

That would make it to easy for non-white/poor people to vote.

^gasp