Common thinking on this forum

[KCPowercat]

call and ask them....maybe they will give it to you. Talking about it on an internet message board does nothing

[aknowledgeableperson]

my point was you must understand the members being skeptical of somebody naming themselves "aknowledgeableperson" and mearly stating they know what's going on because 20 years ago they worked with the city....or whatever. That type of questioning is normal and expected.

Generally most comments critical of me I figure come with the territory. In fact that is a great part of discussions, listening to opposing views. Attacking opposing views by namecalling and putdowns only belittles the person doing it, not the receiver. Remember "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me".

[KCPowercat]

that's why I never participate in namecalling, etc. Counterproductive.

[aknowledgeableperson]

call and ask them....maybe they will give it to you. Talking about it on an internet message board does nothing

I will try but the City Council should have requested and had this information BEFORE the vote to put it on the ballot. Especially since City staff provide quite a bit of material for the Sports Commission arena study.

[aknowledgeableperson]

These folks need to raise hell if they don't have the funding or resources to mainain the parks and boulevards and fountians.

Parks gets funds primarily from two sources - individual tax levy's such as the boulvevard tax and general fund. Parks budget has been hit hard the past few years reflecting the general fund woes. They have cried but little success.

[KCPowercat]

talk with your councilperson about why they did not do that....ask the questions to those in power...not to an internet message board. Attempt to get your questions answered and we'd be glad to hear what you found out. Idly asking why they did or did not do this does nothing, does it?

[Anonymous]

If you have an issue with particular points regarding projecst, thats great. But shouldn't you also have a plan or an idea aobut how you'd handle things differently?

It makes more sense to me to give the P&L time to blossom, then get a better financing deal. It isn't what happened, but nothing can be done about it now.

I throughly looked at the topics CAAT brought up, researched them, found many of them to be lies and the others to be scare tactics.

Good, I would expect as much from any thinking person. The problem I have is that everyone jumped all over those lies and scare tactics while more or less ignoring same from the mayor's office. That's all.

Note that there were no repeated, rabid point-by-point dissections of the mayor's plan. Nobody was calling the mayor a lying sack of crap, though her lies were just as blatant. Nobody insisted on a boycott of companies supporting the arena. There is not equal opportunity skepticism here, regardless of what you wish to believe. Maybe in your head, but it sure doesn't manifest on these forums.

Why stay away and keep your opinion on a subject quiet just because it isn't the popular one? Afraid other internet chatter will quickly shoot it down? So the hell what. Nothing on here is that serious.

It's not about being 'shot down', it's about the social dynamic. I'm not going to a homophobe convention looking for a date, either -- not because I'm afraid they'll kick my ass, but because it is predetermined that I won't find a date.

[mean]

Er, yeah, guess who.

[KCPowercat]

surprise...this is a pro-kc forum. A company dumping $1M into a campaign they really have no business being in will draw a lot of ire from this group especially when we find the deal to be good for the citizens of KC. If they were really trying to protect themselves, let's see how hard they fight the same type of taxes in the new Dallas Cowboys stadium....I'll go ahead and wager they won't fight it to the tune of $1M....

what specific lie by the mayor should we have jumped on? When lies about property taxes increasing are thrown around completely w/o any kind of fact or rhealm of possibility, her calculating the % of rental cars from outside KC residents is quite a little fib if you ask me.


BTW, bad analogy...makes zero sense to expressing your opinion.

[aknowledgeableperson]

A company dumping $1M into a campaign they really have no business being in

Although I may not have agreed with Enterprise they did have a right to contribute to the campaign if they so desired. They have many business locations in Kansas City and many customers that I assume are citizens of Kansas City. If they had no presence or customers in Kansas City then I would complain.
Why not attack those who contributed to the passage of the compaign for their self interests? Unions - for jobs for instance.

[KCPowercat]

they also have locations and employees in Dallas....let's see if they fight it there. If they are truly only interested in their employees and bottom line, they would also fight it there. but they won't...why? If you are telling me not to attack enterprise because they are protecting their interests, then why suggest attacking the unions for protecting their interests?

[aknowledgeableperson]

I did not suggest that we should attack the unions for their contributions. Reread and put the statement in context. If you are going to attack one for protecting its self interest why not attack all who are protecting their own self interests, even if they are on your side.

Agree, it would be interesting to see what happens in Dallas.

[KCPowercat]

#1 would be because I agree with them of course
#2 the amounts contibuted...did the unions give any money, I don't remember seeing their names on the contibution reports. either way the obscene amounts spent by one company to defeat something the community desired
#3 the money was not local...it came from corp. headquarters
#4 the money was given for reasons other than protecting their self-interests in the KC area I believe....just my opinion.
#5 the money was used to spread lies about what was going on. Preying on the ignorance of voters. If they gave money and then went on to give their true reasons, fine. But they tried to say it was a bad deal for KC, that property taxes would go up, etc. Scare tactics.

[Anonymous]

surprise...this is a pro-kc forum.

Sure, and I am by all accounts a pro-KC guy. Being pro-KC doesn't really have anything to do w/ what we're discussing.

what specific lie by the mayor should we have jumped on? When lies about property taxes increasing are thrown around completely w/o any kind of fact or rhealm of possibility

Er, any of them. The problem is, what constitutes a lie? Does implying something without actually saying it equal a lie? Does not mentioning relevant facts constitute a lie? Is picking-and-choosing from statistics to make them say what you want a 'lie'? What about dodging or ignoring direct questions when the answers might not be favorable?

For example, property tax increases are not outside the realm of possibility in a shortfall scenario, even though they aren't part of the plan. To say otherwise is at best ignoring real possibilities that might hurt your cause and at worst a deliberate lie...I mean, the money HAS to come from somewhere in a shortfall, although yes, they will probably raise property taxes only as a last resort. Implying that AEG will be responsible for "cost overruns" and the like is wishful thinking -- the real question is under what scenarios they are covering overruns, and the fact is we don't know yet. But making us feel good about it by leading us to believe it's not the city's responsibility under any circumstances is, again, ignoring real possibilities that might hurt your cause at best and a deliberate lie at worst.

I hope this illustrates the problem with pointing out "specific lies". Someone else can always just say it isn't a lie, or it's 'just a fib', or 'it's not as bad as the other side's lies' and we've gotten nowhere. Until there's a contract we can actually read and draw conclusions from, there's not much point in taking this part of the discussion any further.

they also have locations and employees in Dallas....let's see if they fight it there.

Is Dallas taxing rental cars?

[KCPowercat]

yes, 5% if approved: http://www.nfl.com/teams/story/DAL/7586983

Property tax increase would require another vote. Saying the vote we had will increase property taxes is completely wrong.

AEG will cover cost overruns on construction and operational shortfalls. The city will cover shortfalls if the hotel/rental car fees do not come through to cover bond payments.....all according to the first draft and true until the final contract is signed nothing is for sure. If the contract does not benefit the city, the council we voted into power will hopefully vote down the contract. Contact your councilperson to make sure this is done. Talking about it on this forum does nothing.

You can always find a reason not to do something. In any situation in life.

[aknowledgeableperson]

Honest, I am not the Guest nor do I know who the Guest is.
About being PRO-KC. Just because I, or anyone else, might have a different opinion on a subject does not mean we are not PRO-KC. I am pro Convention Center. Pro PAC, although not strongly. Pro Bi-state II. Pro Plaza. Pro downtown living. And many other items.

[KCPowercat]

it's mean....he just forgot to log in.

you have to take my whole comment, not just the one line. We understand 99.9% of people here are pro city.


Interesting deal in Dallas....public financing could be as high as 50%...and THEY have a pro tenant they are building it for and will be 99.9% of the users of that facility.

[aknowledgeableperson]

Interesting deal in Dallas....public financing could be as high as 50% Kansas City 57% plus...and THEY have a pro tenant Kansas City has none they are building it for and will be 99.9% of the users of that facility.

So this is a good deal for KC? No need to answer, just an idle comment and question.

[KCPowercat]

yes, it actually shows how good of a deal it actually is. With a pro team demanding this new stadium in Dallas, I would hope they could get more private investment from them than 50%.

Our arena will be used for more than one team...it's much more of a community asset in the ways it can be used. Even w/o one major tenant, 43% of the money is private. I find that to be a good deal especially when I see what Arlington is on the hook for.

What is the public portion of arenas in say Oklahoma city and omaha...two regional cities who built big time arenas w/o a major tenant?

[KCPowercat]

Qwest Center = 68% public funding
FedEx Center (with pro team in place) = 100% public financing

can't find Ford Center financing...I know it was done through MAPS, a huge voter approved improvement plan.