KCRag Forum

Kietzman is reporting the Downtown Council will vote tomorrow on a resolution to endorse the TSC renovations. Huh? What's the thinking there?

It sounds like one member is pushing for it and may not have the votes to pull it off.  Apparently they changed the language such that they are endorsing votes for "new OR improved" facilities in order to give it a better chance of getting approved. 

Collison column from yesterday...

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 864800.htm

Rift splits backers of downtown ballpark

“I think that if you were to poll the Downtown Council membership, it would be in favor of downtown baseball and would be surprised if its leadership decided to take that curious position,â€

just because they are voting doesn't mean they will support it.

i'm gon' crack some skulls.

I am told that the Downtown Council support is a "done deal."  Only Jon Copaken and Buzz Willard will vote against.

Right now they are afraid that if it gets voted down they will get blamed and it will have repercussions on future support for downtown initiatives.  They don't want people saying "we lost the Royals because you went crazy about that damn downtown stadium thing" . . .

It's kinda sad.  The Downtown Council did a really brave thing by standing up to the conventional wisdom, only to back down when their voice is needed most.

dangerboy wrote: Right now they are afraid that if it gets voted down they will get blamed and it will have repercussions on future support for downtown initiatives.  They don't want people saying "we lost the Royals because you went crazy about that damn downtown stadium thing" . . .

It's kinda sad.  The Downtown Council did a really brave thing by standing up to the conventional wisdom, only to back down when their voice is needed most.

same thing i just heard today. it is the same either way for either party. if the dt stadium was moving FULL STEAM AHEAD, the tsc supporters, myself included, have little choice at that point. you have to do what is best for the city, and the region.

what i am hearing on 810 and 980 is, yeah, dt stadium would be great and all, however, the sheer numbers wanting to stay at tsc is so much more, coupled with the fact noone, tsc, dt stadium, or anyone in between, wants to see april 4th go down in flames. because everyone is quietly fearing the same end.....................the royals and chiefs near village west and the speedway. and NOONE wants that.

kcdcchef wrote: .....................the royals and chiefs near village west and the speedway. and NOONE wants that.

Ok, let me try to rationalize with Jackson Countians here for a bit....

JaCo's would rather lose the Chiefs and Royals to San Antonio, Vegas, Portland, etc... than to let KS in the same metroplex help aleviate the burden?

If this thing gets passed in April because JaCo's don't want the thing in KS, I think that is for the wrong reason.  I think it should be voted down because it's a stupid idea at the TSC, and because we NEED a dt ballpark.

skim82 wrote: JaCo's would rather lose the Chiefs and Royals to San Antonio, Vegas, Portland, etc... than to let KS in the same metroplex help aleviate the burden?

Kansas had a chance to "aleviate the burden" in 2004.  It was called Bistate II and they voted NO.

I'm all for moving TSC to Village West.  What is the difference?  There is no economic benefit at TSC anyway, and it is a long way from downtown anyway, so why not let the Unified Government foot the bill instead?

if we could redevelop lindwood boulevard and 27th street from main street all the way to van brunt, we could then fix up stadium drive and highway 40, which of course are right by the stadiums!  it will be continuous mixed use and office, rehabs and new construction, apartments and single family, existing and new parks, a high rise retail "node" at van brunt and I-70 (on the south, by the VA hopspital)
and a fixed rail transit system that cruises from the stadiums down linwood boulevard and turns north on paseo to 18th street, where it heads west into crossroads/union station/wherever....

seriously.  i just need 5 billion dollars (maybe just 3 billion), a ton of office users looking for new space near 435 & 70, US 71 and linwood, Paseo & 23rd & 71, and vanbrunt and linwood, and about 60,000-80,000 people who want to live there.  there will be new private schools in the area and the public schools will get increased funding for after school, parent teacher, neighborhood schools focused on ACHIEVEMENT.

then TSC will be in the city!

staubio wrote: I'm all for moving TSC to Village West.  What is the difference?  There is no economic benefit at TSC anyway, and it is a long way from downtown anyway, so why not let the Unified Government foot the bill instead?

Exactly, it is just an ego boost to some having them in the city, even though they aren't really in the "city" at all right now.  Downtown baseball or I don't care.  Let someone else pay for it and have their little ego trip.

It would be interesting to see a Bi-State 2.5 -- with only the stadium improvements on it.  That would make so much sense.

Kard wrote: It would be interesting to see a Bi-State 2.5 -- with only the stadium improvements on it.  That would make so much sense.

It doesn't really make that much sense.  Stadiums would probably do even worse on their own.  The opinion polling showed the stadium side of bistate had much less support than the arts side.  The arts community did the sports teams a big favor by letting them piggyback on the bistate ballot, and it drug down the whole  thing.

dangerboy wrote: It doesn't really make that much sense.  Stadiums would probably do even worse on their own.  The opinion polling showed the stadium side of bistate had much less support than the arts side.  The arts community did the sports teams a big favor by letting them piggyback on the bistate ballot, and it drug down the whole  thing.

Really.  That's surprising to me.  Do you know which region the support was waning the most in?  I'm assuming the KS side.

^ I don't remember, but it was pretty widespread, not just in Kansas.  Go back and look through the old bistate II threads, it was discussed quite a bit.

skim82 wrote: Ok, let me try to rationalize with Jackson Countians here for a bit....

JaCo's would rather lose the Chiefs and Royals to San Antonio, Vegas, Portland, etc... than to let KS in the same metroplex help aleviate the burden?

If this thing gets passed in April because JaCo's don't want the thing in KS, I think that is for the wrong reason.  I think it should be voted down because it's a stupid idea at the TSC, and because we NEED a dt ballpark.

the proof is in the numbers. we do not need a downtown stadium...........if the downtown stadium had the numbers of people speaking for it as the tsc did, and if they had the clout like tsc people do, you would get one.

and as far as letting it go to kansas, again, like db said, 2004, they had their chance, and they collectively voted no, we wish to continue having pro sports they way we had them for 35 years.............free, and without burden to us in any way.

besides, 2004 did not matter that it was at tsc. because all this pie in the sky dream talk of a dt stadium, in it's clay chastainesque fashion, did not appear until 2005, after the vote failed. yeah, there was some talk on here in threads, but not beyond here.

kcdcchef wrote: the proof is in the numbers.

If April 4 fails, will that "prove" that renovating TSC is not supported?

This whole "proof" concept is based on a flaky poll done by Pat Gray, who is getting paid by the Royals and Chiefs.  Pat Gray is so worthless of a pollster that he only does polling in KC.  His national repuation is zero (or less).

TheNorthlander wrote: If April 4 fails, will that "prove" that renovating TSC is not supported?

This whole "proof" concept is based on a flaky poll done by Pat Gray, who is getting paid by the Royals and Chiefs.  Pat Gray is so worthless of a pollster that he only does polling in KC.  His national repuation is zero (or less).

the proof i refer to is the owners of both clubs going on local radio, local tv, and local press, saying they have been contacted by so many people in the metro, saying they prefer arrowhead and kauffman, this, in the face of kietzman, saying he had like 3k emails. did not phase them. so, that is the proof i refer to.

will a failed april 4th vote prove anything? yes. if it fails with a loud THUD, then, yes. if it fails marginally, then, the shitty campaign devoid of renderings, or exact numbers, we blame it on that. but if it fails marginally, it will just reappear on the ballot in november or april, again, with the tsc. if it passes marginally, i would say that merely says........let the work begin.