PDA

View Full Version : Johnson County Question 1


penguinz
11-07-2006, 03:35 PM
So?

Simplex3
11-07-2006, 03:41 PM
This thing is stupid for two reasons.

1. I have never met a person who's kid couldn't play soccer because they had no field available.

2. If it's really a big problem shouldn't we spread them out around the county rather than put them all in one place?

penguinz
11-07-2006, 03:50 PM
This thing is stupid for two reasons.

1. I have never met a person who's kid couldn't play soccer because they had no field available.

2. If it's really a big problem shouldn't we spread them out around the county rather than put them all in one place?

To qualify for national level tournaments you have to have 20 fields in one site. These tournaments can bring in over 400 out of town/state teams for a minimum of 3 days. Each team having an average of 15-18 kids. Plus parents and coaches. That equals a lot of $ in hotels, restaurants, entertainment, etc...

Simplex3
11-07-2006, 03:54 PM
To qualify for national level tournaments you have to have 20 fields in one site. These tournaments can bring in over 400 out of town/state teams for a minimum of 3 days. Each team having an average of 15-18 kids. Plus parents and coaches. That equals a lot of $ in hotels, restaurants, entertainment, etc...
So let the hotels, restaurants, etc pay to build the f**king fields.

Mecca
11-07-2006, 03:56 PM
So let the hotels, restaurants, etc pay to build the f**king fields.

I have a friend that coaches soccer........I could imagine what he'd have to say about this...

noa
11-07-2006, 04:00 PM
To qualify for national level tournaments you have to have 20 fields in one site. These tournaments can bring in over 400 out of town/state teams for a minimum of 3 days. Each team having an average of 15-18 kids. Plus parents and coaches. That equals a lot of $ in hotels, restaurants, entertainment, etc...


Are there tournaments looking for new venues? Is this just pure speculation, or do we actually have a chance of seeing these revenues?

Simplex3
11-07-2006, 04:02 PM
I have a friend that coaches soccer........I could imagine what he'd have to say about this...
Wow, someone who would want everyone else to buy crap they'll use. You have quite a unique friend. I mean, people like that aren't a dime a dozen.

penguinz
11-07-2006, 04:04 PM
It would not be a tournament looking for a new venue. It would be all new tournaments. Competitive traveling teams are always looking for new places to travel to with great facilities. The plans for the one here would make it one of the premier venues in the nation.

Also don't forget it is more than just soccer. It includes a playground, community center, etc...

penguinz
11-07-2006, 04:05 PM
So let the hotels, restaurants, etc pay to build the f**king fields.
So you are saying you don't have the knowledge of this to make an educated statement on it?

Rain Man
11-07-2006, 04:12 PM
What's the issue?

CHENZ A!
11-07-2006, 04:48 PM
I just don't understand why anyone would be against something like this, just because they or their families don't play soccer. It seems to me like a no brainer that this would be good for our community.

Also hopefully the Wizards would get a new home out of the deal, because I really think the MLS is on the rise, and if we let them go now, we will regret it.

Rain Man
11-07-2006, 04:49 PM
What's the issue?

JBucc
11-07-2006, 04:51 PM
I'm not sure what it is but I voted yes.

hawkchief
11-07-2006, 04:52 PM
This is a blatant money grab by Price Brothers Development who stand to make millions if the bill passes. I coach 3rd grade girls soccer, and have no problem getting fields. Do we really need more traffic on 69 hiway?? There are better alternatives.

CHENZ A!
11-07-2006, 04:54 PM
This is a blatant money grab by Price Brothers Development who stand to make millions if the bill passes. I coach 3rd grade girls soccer, and have no problem getting fields. Do we really need more traffic on 69 hiway?? There are better alternatives.

Regardless of the plan, or the location, someone will always be getting paid.

BWillie
11-07-2006, 05:00 PM
I vote no, big freaking deal. Soccer fields? Seriously, who cares. There are bigger issues needing to be discussed. Ah hell, maybe you should vote yes. I can just hang out at the soccer fields and try to bone hot soccer moms who hate their rich husbands.

Simplex3
11-07-2006, 06:03 PM
So you are saying you don't have the knowledge of this to make an educated statement on it?
So just because I don't think economic development is the responsibility of the govt. I don't know about this issue? The "Vote Yes" money for this deal came from the group selling the land and who owns a bunch of the land around it. If this is such a grand deal why don't they build it all themselves and take all the profit? Why? Simple. If it doesn't work they'll be out a bunch of money. Unless, of course, they find a way to get YOU to pay for it.

Halfcan
11-07-2006, 06:13 PM
Vote no for everything-it makes it easier that way.

DaFace
11-07-2006, 06:29 PM
I voted no (in the CP poll). Since I have no idea what the issue is, does that skew the results?

VonneMarie
11-07-2006, 06:38 PM
I voted No because only the snooty rich JC brats can afford to play on it. Of course I don't get a vote, but if I did, I would vote NO!

penguinz
11-07-2006, 06:47 PM
So just because I don't think economic development is the responsibility of the govt. I don't know about this issue? The "Vote Yes" money for this deal came from the group selling the land and who owns a bunch of the land around it. If this is such a grand deal why don't they build it all themselves and take all the profit? Why? Simple. If it doesn't work they'll be out a bunch of money. Unless, of course, they find a way to get YOU to pay for it.Do you realize the group that owns this land and the land around it would make more if the land was sold to businesses for retail development?

Mr. Laz
11-07-2006, 07:23 PM
I voted No because only the snooty rich JC brats can afford to play on it. Of course I don't get a vote, but if I did, I would vote NO!
LMAO

so you would vote "NO" for the people of johnson county to pay for fields for their kids to play on??

nice of you to want to decide how other people spend their money.


btw - the question is losing pretty bad

Rain Man
11-07-2006, 07:26 PM
What's the issue?

DaFace
11-07-2006, 07:31 PM
What's the issue?

I gave up and looked it up.

http://ladymonchhichi.blogspot.com/2006/10/johnson-county-kansas-question-1.html

“Shall the following be adopted? Shall the Johnson County Park and Recreation District issue general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $75,000,000 to acquire land for park purposes within the boundaries of Unified School District No. 229, Johnson County, State of Kansas (Blue Valley School District), and to develop thereon soccer fields, training and community facilities, concessions, restrooms, general maintenance facilities and all related appurtenances, all pursuant to K.S.A. 19-2862j, K.S.A. 19-2874 and K.S.A. 10-101 et seq.?”

JBucc
11-07-2006, 07:32 PM
I gave up and looked it up.

“Shall the following be adopted? Shall the Johnson County Park and Recreation District issue general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $75,000,000 to acquire land for park purposes within the boundaries of Unified School District No. 229, Johnson County, State of Kansas (Blue Valley School District), and to develop thereon soccer fields, training and community facilities, concessions, restrooms, general maintenance facilities and all related appurtenances, all pursuant to K.S.A. 19-2862j, K.S.A. 19-2874 and K.S.A. 10-101 et seq.?”So 75 million dollar soccer fields? I should've voted no.

Rain Man
11-07-2006, 07:34 PM
Shouldn't they be investing money in football? I don't like where this country is headed sometimes.

Deberg_1990
11-07-2006, 07:35 PM
Ah hell, maybe you should vote yes. I can just hang out at the soccer fields and try to bone hot soccer moms who hate their rich husbands.

Thats worth a YES vote!!

Rain Man
11-07-2006, 07:35 PM
Man, I'm voting no on that. You could build a lot of football fields for that money.

VonneMarie
11-07-2006, 08:20 PM
LMAO

so you would vote "NO" for the people of johnson county to pay for fields for their kids to play on??

nice of you to want to decide how other people spend their money.


btw - the question is losing pretty bad
JC can SUCK IT!

Simplex3
11-07-2006, 08:22 PM
Do you realize the group that owns this land and the land around it would make more if the land was sold to businesses for retail development?
They're selling the land for the soccer park at over $150k/acre. The other surrounding land they own will go WAAAAY up in value once you and I paid for the soccer park. Unless it flopped, in which case it wouldn't have hurt them a bit.

I say again, if it's such a brilliant idea and such a great money maker then come talk to me, I may invest. Privately.

redbrian
11-07-2006, 08:26 PM
So let the hotels, restaurants, etc pay to build the f**king fields.

Would they be able to keep the tax revenue generated by the fields?

Simplex3
11-07-2006, 08:33 PM
Would they be able to keep the tax revenue generated by the fields?
What tax revenue? It would be a privately held business.

redbrian
11-07-2006, 08:37 PM
What tax revenue? It would be a privately held business.

The tax revenue being generated by the people attending the events through the purchase of services and goods in the surounding area, which will be in the millions of dollars.

Simplex3
11-07-2006, 08:42 PM
The tax revenue being generated by the people attending the events through the purchase of services and goods in the surounding area, which will be in the millions of dollars.
The sales taxes? The govt. gets that either way. I'm not getting your point, though I'm sure it's coming as soon as I type some tripword you're looking for. The only difference is who pays to build the thing.

redbrian
11-07-2006, 08:51 PM
The sales taxes? The govt. gets that either way. I'm not getting your point, though I'm sure it's coming as soon as I type some tripword you're looking for.


Here is how is works, these fields will be used for tournaments which bring players and families into the area who would not come to the area without the tournaments, they will be spending money on goods and services in the area which they would not be buying except for the fact that they are coming to the area to attend the tournaments. The only reason that the extra money would be spent in the area is because of the tournaments.

A real life example;

The City of Gladstone is helping to build a Natatorium for the North Kansas City School District and the local community to use. The Natatorium will be large enough to host swim meets up to the state final levels. The money generated from taxes collected on goods and services purchased by the athletes and the families and supporters is estimated in the millions of dollars over the life of the facility, giving a very respectable return on the money invested by the city. The upshot being this will help hold down property taxes.

I hope I have made that clear.

Simplex3
11-07-2006, 08:56 PM
Here is how is works, these fields will be used for tournaments which bring players and families into the area who would not come to the area without the tournaments, they will be spending money on goods and services in the area which they would not be buying except for the fact that they are coming to the area to attend the tournaments. The only reason that the extra money would be spent in the area is because of the tournaments.

A real life example;

The City of Gladstone is helping to build a Natatorium for the North Kansas City School District and the local community to use. The Natatorium will be large enough to host swim meets up to the state final levels. The money generated from taxes collected on goods and services purchased by the athletes and the families and supporters is estimated in the millions of dollars over the life of the facility, giving a very respectable return on the money invested by the city. The upshot being this will help hold down property taxes.

I hope I have made that clear.
Yes, and if the businesses near there ponied up $75M to build it then all of that would still happen and they'd still see the economic benefits.

I get what you're saying, my point is that NONE OF THIS is in the pervue of the government.

The folks in Gladstone will soon get their dose of reality just like the turnpike in KS. They were supposed to remove the toll boths decades ago, once the road was paid for. For some reason those are all still there. Why? Once the government finds their way into your wallet you can't get them to back out.

CHENZ A!
11-07-2006, 09:04 PM
I voted No because only the snooty rich JC brats can afford to play on it. Of course I don't get a vote, but if I did, I would vote NO!

Just for the record, not everyone in JC is rich... or snooty.

Also, the fields would let rich snooty kids from all over the midwest come and play on them, not just rich snooty Kansas kids. :)

redbrian
11-07-2006, 09:04 PM
Yes, and if the businesses near there ponied up $75M to build it then all of that would still happen and they'd still see the economic benefits.

I get what you're saying, my point is that NONE OF THIS is in the pervue of the government.

The folks in Gladstone will soon get their dose of reality just like the turnpike in KS. They were supposed to remove the toll boths decades ago, once the road was paid for. For some reason those are all still there. Why? Once the government finds their way into your wallet you can't get them to back out.

You lost me on that comparison, how is the City in this example getting into anyones "wallet"; it's a one time outlay for the natatorium with a continuing income for the city in the form of taxes from the sales of services and goods.

The tax revenue (collected from the sales of goods and services) generated for the city helps to hold down property taxes.

To put it another way I’m sure you have heard the old saying it takes money to make money, the local government needs to generate money.

When the local government can invest money and get a good return on that investment it is a prudent thing to do.

Thig Lyfe
11-07-2006, 09:07 PM
They'd be building on what is currently just a beautiful field. One of the few still left in the area. I went with No, but unfortunately it's going to get developed anyway, somehow.

redbrian
11-07-2006, 09:11 PM
They'd be building on what is currently just a beautiful field. One of the few still left in the area. I went with No, but unfortunately it's going to get developed anyway, somehow.

You can count on that, with the soccer fields you would have more green space left, with out the fields you will get more concrete and asphalt and ugly suburban architecture.

KILLER_CLOWN
11-07-2006, 09:16 PM
Just say NO to the government offering to reach into your pocket. I won't even get into the soccer thing, just NO NO NO. I hired a headhunter to bring in illegals to vote no on this, I consider it a worthwhile investment.

VonneMarie
11-07-2006, 09:23 PM
LOL! KC might finally get the light rail... passing 53-47 with 54% in. :)

Thig Lyfe
11-07-2006, 09:23 PM
You can count on that, with the soccer fields you would have more green space left, with out the fields you will get more concrete and asphalt and ugly suburban architecture.

Yeah... that's the only reason I would have to support it.

KILLER_CLOWN
11-07-2006, 09:24 PM
LOL! KC might finally get the light rail... passing 53-47 with 54% in. :)

It's about time we stepped out from the stone age.

VonneMarie
11-07-2006, 09:25 PM
It's about time we stepped out from the stone age.
I'm so happy I could cry... WooWoo

CHENZ A!
11-07-2006, 09:25 PM
LOL! KC might finally get the light rail... passing 53-47 with 54% in. :)

Everyone is tired of getting DUI's.

Thig Lyfe
11-07-2006, 09:31 PM
LOL! KC might finally get the light rail... passing 53-47 with 54% in. :)

Awesome.

VonneMarie
11-07-2006, 09:33 PM
Light rail... :drool:

morphius
11-07-2006, 10:24 PM
Light rail... :drool:
People are excited about a light rail from the airport to Swope park and the exciting gondola? While it might be nice for KC to have some sort of light rail this doesn't exactly scream great plan.

KILLER_CLOWN
11-07-2006, 11:13 PM
People are excited about a light rail from the airport to Swope park and the exciting gondola? While it might be nice for KC to have some sort of light rail this doesn't exactly scream great plan.


You have to start somewhere, i mean when the wheel was invented you didn't hear the critics say "well gee that's great but can you make a vehicle that would use 4 of those and achieve 0-60 in 5 seconds or less or is this just worthless?"

ChiefsCountry
11-07-2006, 11:20 PM
Was that 75 million going to be used for a new Wizards stadium as well?

Simplex3
11-07-2006, 11:24 PM
Was that 75 million going to be used for a new Wizards stadium as well?
No, according to everything I read. That was separate.

Baconeater
11-07-2006, 11:37 PM
$75M for soccer fields?

ROFL

penguinz
11-08-2006, 06:06 AM
What tax revenue? It would be a privately held business.It would have been owned and maintained by Johnson County Parks and Recreation.

VonneMarie
11-08-2006, 06:44 AM
People are excited about a light rail from the airport to Swope park and the exciting gondola? While it might be nice for KC to have some sort of light rail this doesn't exactly scream great plan.
No... I do believe that it would evntually expand, genius. But, last I hear was the city is going to challenge it.

So who knows. :(

morphius
11-08-2006, 07:18 AM
You have to start somewhere, i mean when the wheel was invented you didn't hear the critics say "well gee that's great but can you make a vehicle that would use 4 of those and achieve 0-60 in 5 seconds or less or is this just worthless?"
My thought is that if you start out with something that is haphazard then try to expand it... Well, you end up with useless crap.

It is a bit disappointing that the Soccer fields didn't pass, only because I think KC, being smack dab in the middle of the country and a pretty decent sports town, has opportunities to be sort of a central place to hold events like that. Soon we should get our Schlitterbahn, Worlds of Fun, Downtown Arena, improved Truman Complex, Raceway, and if the hiring of the Omaha Zoo manager can get our Zoo on par with Omaha's... Well, I just think there are some opportunities and I will leave it at that.

morphius
(what is the latest on the lego land park in Olathe?)

penguinz
11-08-2006, 07:25 AM
I gave up and looked it up.

http://ladymonchhichi.blogspot.com/2006/10/johnson-county-kansas-question-1.html

“Shall the following be adopted? Shall the Johnson County Park and Recreation District issue general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $75,000,000 to acquire land for park purposes within the boundaries of Unified School District No. 229, Johnson County, State of Kansas (Blue Valley School District), and to develop thereon soccer fields, training and community facilities, concessions, restrooms, general maintenance facilities and all related appurtenances, all pursuant to K.S.A. 19-2862j, K.S.A. 19-2874 and K.S.A. 10-101 et seq.?”Too bad that source has inaccurate info in it. It says that 16 of the fileds were to be Astroturf. which is untrue. They were going to be sprint turf. Big difference between the two.

Simplex3
11-08-2006, 07:37 AM
Even the moron from the Parks & Rec Dept. last night admitted that $75M was a hefty price tag, but that in order to have "the ammenities we thought were needed in Johnson County" it was going to cost quite a bit.

Like what, a f**king govt. owned Starbucks between every field? Give me a break.

Simplex3
11-08-2006, 07:46 AM
It would have been owned and maintained by Johnson County Parks and Recreation.
It would have been a private business in the hypothetical I was spinning.

penguinz
11-08-2006, 10:09 AM
Even the moron from the Parks & Rec Dept. last night admitted that $75M was a hefty price tag, but that in order to have "the ammenities we thought were needed in Johnson County" it was going to cost quite a bit.

Like what, a f**king govt. owned Starbucks between every field? Give me a break.A lot of the cost was a state of the art community center. Also factor int he cost of putting in 16 sprint turf fields. The fields would cost a lot more up front than grass but less in maintenance over time.