KCRag Forum

3642 ballots received
3506 ballots counted

So 136, or 3.7% were invalid in some manner.

5758 ballots were sent. Let's say that every one not returned was a No vote.
the 2458 yes votes would have been 42.6% of that number

So the only way it could have lost is if there's thousands of people that were willing to request a ballot but too lazy to return it and they all hate the idea of the streetcar. Seems unlikely.

If the ballots not returned were split evenly yes vs no and they were all properly notarized and returned on time that would have been another 1058 votes for each side
For a hypothetical total of 3516 to 2106
or 62.5% yes. Still a clear win.

If the ballots not returned were 70% against the train
3092 to 2529. Still a yes win

It takes unreasonable expectations on the non-returned ballots for it to have swung to a loss

Approved...
http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/kc ... =mainstage

Voters have approved the creation of a new taxing district that could eventually lead to expansion of the downtown streetcar system to the University of Missouri Kansas City.

The vote was 2,458 in favor of and 1,048 against the formation of an expanded streetcar taxing district past downtown along the Main Street corridor through Midtown. The vote came after an unusual mail-in ballot process, and the election results were certified Friday at the Kansas City Election Board offices

.

Good job Dave and everybody else. Now let's get it to Waldo.

So tell me how to vote Tuesday on Q1 and Q2. I haven't followed the Chastain thing closely.

KC_JAYHAWK wrote:So tell me how to vote Tuesday on Q1 and Q2. I haven't followed the Chastain thing closely.

KCRTA support it, they submitted the TDD petition and did a lot of that effort.

No on Q1. It's an over reach, hobbles future efforts around rail transit and has some critical flaws in it.

Yes on Q2. It's not a perfect plan by any means but it's better than waiting years to have a chance at 10 miles of rail. It looks like a modified city streetcar plan which is one of its strengths.
The as much as possible model is the best part. Something can be built for sure.

the director election will actually be on saturday, october 7 (more on that later). all of the details will be in the motion to form the district, which should be approved by the circuit court judge in short order.

once the TDD board is seated, they will set the date for the final election. KCRTA's date is simply a suggestion, but the TDD board won't have its own resources to fund it so KCRTA will clearly have some influence.

Q1 -yuge NO
Q2 - yes

If Q2 passes and the sales tax is created, does it speed up the construction timeline for the current extension? And would future extensions be contingent on the formation of new TDDs and levied taxes within? It's my understand (correct me if I'm wrong) that the sales tax created by Q2 could help us avoid seeking matching federal funds which gives us some autonomy on infrastructure development.

Yes, yes, and yes.

pash wrote:Well, done, everybody. The margin of victory was almost identical to the vote in 2012 to establish the original downtown TDD, by the way.

I was expecting a bigger win given the initial downtown line was a big unknown. This is the ShowMe state and with the first line's success demonstrated, would have thought a larger % would now be for it than in 2012.

JBmidtown wrote:If Q2 passes and the sales tax is created, does it speed up the construction timeline for the current extension? And would future extensions be contingent on the formation of new TDDs and levied taxes within? It's my understand (correct me if I'm wrong) that the sales tax created by Q2 could help us avoid seeking matching federal funds which gives us some autonomy on infrastructure development.

DaveKCMO wrote:Yes, yes, and yes.

Nice to hear Fed matching may not be needed.

Out of necessity. Fucking Trump.

earthling wrote:

pash wrote:Well, done, everybody. The margin of victory was almost identical to the vote in 2012 to establish the original downtown TDD, by the way.

I was expecting a bigger win given the initial downtown line was a big unknown. This is the ShowMe state and with the first line's success demonstrated, would have thought a larger % would now be for it than in 2012.

70% yes is in the top tier for a transit ballot nationwide

http://www.cfte.org/pages/2016_election_results
Here's last year. I count 11 of 78 that meet or exceed 70% and it's right on line with the average win rate over 15 years nationwide

it shows that a KC transit election can match the national results finally

You might notice they forgot to put KC's transit item on the list for last year .

^Are most of those are city-wide votes? This was only for those who live along line. Given this election was for those generally near streetcar line, was expecting a bit higher, especially given the huge success of starter line. But all in all, it's still solid support.

had every voter that received a ballot returned their ballot, the margin would have been higher (only 55% of ballots in 64111 were returned, for example, which had the lion's share of voters and supporters -- compared to 77% in 64112, where most of the opposition was).

every "no" voter we identified returned their ballot pretty early on. i think you can confidently say that there are no more than this 1,048 "no" voters who'll participate in the process inside the TDD boundary.

this bodes well for the final election that enables the sales tax and special assessments. the margin is high enough that 5% or more could erode as we saw in the 2012 vote.

we'll definitely be looking for ways to improve turnout (actual returned ballots) for that final election. 12% just isn't good enough!

Good enough to elect a mayor and put us through thousands of petitions.

KCPowercat wrote:Good enough to elect a mayor and put us through thousands of petitions.

"Buying" elections has consequences, too.

I'm not going to be able to canvass today for pretty obvious reasons but I'll make a social media push all weekend. I still feel confident about this.

Why would we carry the load financially on a broader rail plan without federal matching funds? Just wait for a change in administration. If that's the plan with the Chastian vote, it changes my vote.