Official arena opposition: Coalition Against Arena Taxes

Prudhomme · Post by **Prudhomme** » Wed Jul 28, 2004 3:36 pm

Is there a main message board for the vote yes crowd. I cannot get enough of this stuff!

On their commercial they attribute a quote to "the paper" when that paper is in Sedalia.

Also I have been reading some of the selections from their economist. As we await disclosure of how he was paid, I wondered why they picked him. I started reading some of his work. See below or Google this guy. He has position papers that he finds a way to apply to every plan that these tax opponents pay him to review. He is a hired gun that supplies a predictable analysis. Twice he is refered to as, "the leading critic of public subsidies for the support of sporting events and/or sports facilities."

I hope this isn't going to get fouled up. These holes need to be addressed by the local media.

Who is Robert Baade?
Professor Robert Baade (Lake Forest College, Lake Forest, IL) is the leading critic of public subsidies for the support of sporting events and/or sports facilities. http://roadsidephotos.com/baseball/hadley06.htm

http://www.stoptaxonkc.org/img/an2/nons ... de_bio.pdf

Professor Robert Baade
JD Vale, Professor of Economics
Lakeforest College
Department of Economics
555 North Sheridan Rd.
Lakeforest, Illinois 60045

"An Economic Slam Dunk or March Madness? Assessing the Economic Impact of the NCAA Basketball Tournament," (with Robert Baade), The Economics of College Athletics, John Fizel and Rodney Fort, eds., forthcoming.

His position summary:
http://www.planning.unc.edu/courses/261 ... /baade.htm

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Wed Jul 28, 2004 3:36 pm

Here's one I did...Scooter feel free to make your own, I did this quickly

http://www.kcskyscrapers.com/images/arenaflyer.jpg

scooterj · Post by **scooterj** » Wed Jul 28, 2004 3:39 pm

That looks great!

scooterj · Post by **scooterj** » Wed Jul 28, 2004 5:55 pm

On the other hand, here's something I spotted that looks horrible:

Ugh

Post by **staubio** » Wed Jul 28, 2004 7:19 pm

What is frustrating me is that some of the people I've talked to who think they want to vote no are doing so because they are really undecided. "Well, I don't know if we'll get a team, so I think I'll vote against it"

WHAT?!? Where do these people come from? Not only does getting a team not matter much, but it isn't the whole picture or anything to hang your hat on. It seems that if anything the anti crowd says makes sense to them, they'll cling to it and assume voting no is a good idea.

Lets just hope some of these people read the ballot language. It might be the first time they have a clue about what the tax really is.

I've converted 2 today. Keep up the good work, y'all.

trailerkid · Post by **trailerkid** » Wed Jul 28, 2004 7:32 pm

scooterj wrote: I may do just that, slightly reworded. The "New Day" banners don't make the point that's needed to be made here.

Please, Please, Please....

Someone wear an "I'm with Stupid >" shirt.

Post by **staubio** » Wed Jul 28, 2004 10:33 pm

Got the opposing mailer today.

Union Station, vanishing trash bags. Bartle Hall, and now ... Question 1.

-Millions more of OUR tax dollars.
-An arena with NO real plans, NO design and NO sports team.
-It's time to say "NO"..."NO" to city hall waste on taxpayers' backs.

On the flipside: "Here we go again... Higher Taxes. Another wasteful city hall project... and no accountability.

That piss anyone off as much as me?

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Wed Jul 28, 2004 10:36 pm

vanishing trash bags...that is REEEEACHING.

completely misstating the truth but what else should we expect? I have faith in the voters to not fall for these tactics.

kcteen · Post by **kcteen** » Wed Jul 28, 2004 10:43 pm

on the 10 pm news they said that the city has filed a complaint with the elections board against CAAT for fraduleant (sp?) financial disclosures. They say that things were omitted, like for example, the "paid" consultant who wasnt paid, according to the forms...where'd that money come from?

anyways, good pro-arena press

kcteen

scooterj · Post by **scooterj** » Thu Jul 29, 2004 2:37 pm

Every once in a while I check out the opposition site to see what kind of lies or scheming they are cooking up next. I was reading their FAQ just now, which I never looked at before, and caught som doozies. Check THIS sh*t out...

First, an appetizer...

Q. Who is funding the campaign against Question 1?
A. The Coalition Against Arena Taxes is a campaign committee; our effort is funded by our members.

They won't even tell themselves who funds themselves!

But now check out this BIG CONTRADICTION.....

Q. Wonâ€™t this just be a tax on visitors?
A. No. This tax applies to anyone who rents a car or hotel room. According to the largest rental car company 60 percent of its cars rented in Kansas City are from local residents.

Okay, that's the same claim we've heard all along, right? But then check out their answer to another question just 3 items later on the same page!

Q. How much will this tax raise?
A. The supporters have estimated that the tax has been estimated to raise $7 million a year from the car rental industry to help fund the estimated $250 million needed to develop the arena. We believe that this estimation is inherently flawed for a number of reasons:

a. This estimation assumes that there would be no market distortion whatsoever in the car rental industry...

(Emphasis added by me.)

Can you believe that? They cite as fact claims made by Enterprise (that Enterprise refuses to support with evidence, also this percentage they claim changes often), but THEN use the fact that car rental agencies might LIE ABOUT THEIR BUSINESS to back up their claim that the tax won't raise the money needed!!!!!

They also keep making it sound like the tax is expected to raise $250,000,000 when the truth is it's only needed or expected to raise $125,000,000.

They also keep stating that KC is at the bottom of the list for consideration for an expansion or relocated team. No sh*t, and we'll always be if we don't act.

They're also boasting that experts are chiming in against the arena. Never mind that these 3 out of town experts were hunted down and paid for their opinions by CAAT. With enough money you can find someone somewhere who will say anything.

I hate these guys.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Thu Aug 05, 2004 12:03 pm

HAHA!!!

http://www.stoptaxonkc.org/stop_tax_on_kc/index.html

As you know by now, Question 1 passed last night. And, while it is tough to lose an election, we managed to succeed in having a public airing of this issue among Kansas Citians prior to the vote.

One of the reasons we decided to fight this tax was because the City's leaders did not show any willingness to thoroughly discuss this issue with our residents prior to the vote. On behalf of all of the coalition members who supported this initiative and all of the campaign volunteers who tirelessly worked on behalf of our common cause, we would like to thank each and every one of you.

In the coming days and weeks ahead, we will continue to watch as arena development unfolds. In the meantime, if you would like to stay informed of this issue, we invite you to visit www.kcmo.org for more information.

Way to spend $1,000,000. Can I have a tshirt?