PDA

View Full Version : How will YOU vote on the Stadium issue?


Sig Kauffman
10-10-2004, 01:34 PM
Shall a retail sales tax of one-fourth (1/4) of one cent be levied and collected in Kansas and
Missouri metropolitan Culture District (“Bistate Metropolitan District”) consisting of Johnson
County, Kansas and Jackson County, Missouri, and such other counties which are or may
become part of the Bistate Metropolitan District and which authorize this tax to be levied
(each a “Participating County”), including the counties of Clay and Platte in Missouri and
Wyandotte in Kansas?

Phobia
10-10-2004, 01:41 PM
I'll vote no. When the state starts giving me money to improve the facilities at my business, I'll vote yes.

I have more reasons that just that, but I don't really feel like getting into it while I'm watching the games.

keg in kc
10-10-2004, 01:50 PM
If I vote, I'll vote no. I don't like band-aid plans. It's just postponing the inevitable. I'd rather see us spend, say, 600-750 million now than spend 400 million now and then 2 billion ten or fifteen years from now when both the teams threaten to leave.

JMO. Of course, I guess doing something is better than doing nothing. Both stadiums do need work.

Dr. Johnny Fever
10-10-2004, 01:52 PM
I live in Illinois, so I don't think they'll let me vote. You can ask my sister in Lee's Summitt though if you want.

jynni
10-10-2004, 01:53 PM
I will vote Yes because not only does this give money for stadium improvements, money will go to performing arts endevors.

Shawnee Mission Theater in the Park will get money as will the new performing arts center that is being built in KC. This is one area that I like to see money go into as it is often overlooked.

VonneMarie
10-10-2004, 01:56 PM
If I vote, I'll vote no. I don't like band-aid plans. It's just postponing the inevitable. I'd rather see us spend, say, 600-750 million now than spend 400 million now and then 2 billion ten or fifteen years from now when both the teams threaten to leave.

Exactly. I'm voting NO.

Phobia
10-10-2004, 03:22 PM
If I vote, I'll vote no. I don't like band-aid plans. It's just postponing the inevitable. I'd rather see us spend, say, 600-750 million now than spend 400 million now and then 2 billion ten or fifteen years from now when both the teams threaten to leave.

JMO. Of course, I guess doing something is better than doing nothing. Both stadiums do need work.

Thanks for typing that for me. It saved me a lot of time.

Another issue for me is dual purpose stadiums. With all the architectural advancements of the past 30 years, don't tell me a firm can't develop a transforming stadium that will appeal to baseball/football/soccer for <2/3rds the cost of 2 brand new venues. I know dual purpose stadiums suck, but if somebody really wanted to, they could be innovative with adaptable seating.

chiefs4me
10-10-2004, 03:34 PM
Forgive me for asking but are you talking about royals and chiefs stadiums,,,,I did not realize this was happening,,,so they both want new sites,, and they threatened to leave,,,,the chiefs actually said they would leave??

Phobia
10-10-2004, 03:37 PM
No, this is a revitalization project for both stadiums. They want $238 million from taxpayers. They also both want new stadiums at some point in the future.

Sig Kauffman
10-10-2004, 03:43 PM
Another issue for me is dual purpose stadiums. With all the architectural advancements of the past 30 years, don't tell me a firm can't develop a transforming stadium that will appeal to baseball/football/soccer for <2/3rds the cost of 2 brand new venues.


Nowadays though, everyone wants their own stadium. Only 3 stadiums (Network Associates Coliseum in Oakland, the Metrodome in Minneapolis and Pro Player Stadium in Miami) are still home to both a football and baseball team. The dual-stadium thing much like what KC has is becoming the big thing. Seattle, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Pittsburgh and soon Dallas/Ft. Worth will have 2 stadiums sharing the same parking lot.

There's actually good reason for that too...anyone hear about how the Minnesota Twins had to stop their game in the 11th inning or so so they could convert the dome into football for the Gophers.

chiefs4me
10-10-2004, 03:43 PM
Well since I don't live in Mo anymore I guess my 2 cents doesn't matter,,,,but why spend that kind of money now and want new stadiums in a few years,,makes you wander how some of these people in power got their jobs,,,,


ps,,thank you for answering all my ??

memyselfI
10-10-2004, 03:48 PM
I'm voting NO.

Ultra Peanut
10-10-2004, 04:23 PM
I somehow saw this as "Saddam." I was intrigued.

whoman69
10-10-2004, 06:50 PM
I don't live in KC, but I would hope this doesn't turn out like with Busch stadium in StL. They revamped the stadium in '92, did more improvements in '96 and now they are getting a new stadium. Arrowhead, much like Dodger stadium in baseball is a great stadium well ahead of its time. I believe its problems can be corrected instead of replacing it with some sterile money making old boys club like in Washington and Denver where the fans spend more time in lounges than they do in the stands.

KCWolfman
10-10-2004, 08:12 PM
Well since I don't live in Mo anymore I guess my 2 cents doesn't matter,,,,but why spend that kind of money now and want new stadiums in a few years,,makes you wander how some of these people in power got their jobs,,,,


ps,,thank you for answering all my ??
Two cents worth. That is eight dollars purchased with this tax.

For every 100.00 it works out to a lousy 25 cents. I don't mind paying that at all.

It sure beats paying that lame KC Earnings tax which is taken out every two weeks for a city falling apart school wise, entertainment wise, and sports wise. At least I know how the money is allocated in advance, which is more than I can say for the KC school funds.

go bo
10-10-2004, 08:15 PM
I live in Illinois, so I don't think they'll let me vote. You can ask my sister in Lee's Summitt though if you want.what? you have siblings?

i guess i figured you for a one-of-a-kind kinda guy... :p

go bo
10-10-2004, 08:19 PM
Thanks for typing that for me. It saved me a lot of time.

Another issue for me is dual purpose stadiums. With all the architectural advancements of the past 30 years, don't tell me a firm can't develop a transforming stadium that will appeal to baseball/football/soccer for <2/3rds the cost of 2 brand new venues. I know dual purpose stadiums suck, but if somebody really wanted to, they could be innovative with adaptable seating.well, we'd only need a dual purpose stadium if the royals were gonna stay in kc...

but it's doubtful that they will be here too much longer...

the market is just too small, apparently...

everytime we get a good player come up through the farm system we trade them away for next to nothing because we can't afford to pay them what they're worth...

it's annoying to see so many good players for other (big market) teams that were once royals...

VonneMarie
10-10-2004, 08:22 PM
And another thing with this new arena coming if we get an NHL or NBA, I'm afraid that's gonna push out the Royals. I don't think KC could support 3 or 4 sports franchises. Tho I would love to see it here.

Big Dog
10-10-2004, 08:42 PM
I'm voting no because the 6 gold level seats and 2 parking passes we pay for (over 5K this year) seems plenty to me. I can't tell you how upset all this crap makes me feel. Billion dollar franchises need the help of the peopl to keep their stadiums (that we paid for in the first place) in good shape? BAH

Oh, and just because 'everyone else does it' doesn't make it right.

I bleed Chief's red like the rest of you, but if the Chiefs pulled a 'Browns' I would be crushed, but turn my back on football as fast as I did baseball after the last strike...by the way, do they still play baseball on a professional level in this city? :hmmm:

Mark M
10-11-2004, 06:42 AM
I'm voting for it, but not because of the stadium issues.

The art district that is proposed is why I'm voiting for this measure.

Throwing in the stadium upgrades was kinda weak, IMHO, but it's something that needs to be done. The residents in KC will NOT go for $400-500 million for new stadiums, and I have enough faith in HOK and the other stadium design firms in town that, whatever they do, they will do enough to keep the stadium viable for at least another 20 years.

MM
~~:thumb:

KCN
10-11-2004, 07:42 AM
It is unfortunate that the arts funding got lumped into this. KC needs a nationally known performing arts center to continue regaining its status as a national destination.

If it were just the stadium funding, I would vote no. I have seen renderings of the projected improvements and they are not worth 2/3 the cost of building a new stadium. Just wait a few years and bring the royals downtown in a new facility down the street from the arena for just $100M more.

As it stands now I'm still undecided. I voted "not voting" forgetting that this issue was on the back of my absentee ballot.

redbrian
10-11-2004, 07:58 AM
I'm voting yes on this, I don't see this as a stop gap, Arrow Head and the K are not going to be replaced any time soon (if ever), there is more of a chance of MLB falling apart or the Royals leaving town.

The bi-state is a good tax for the region, it is going to support a lot of cultural and entertainment venues (not just sports), which are required to induce top notch corporations to move to the KC area.

The downtown rebirth is gaining critical mass which this will only add to, with the announcement of H&R block adding a 300 seat performance space for the rep, the exceedingly hot residential market downtown, this tax will help bring the performing arts center off the page to reality.

redbrian
10-11-2004, 08:04 AM
It is unfortunate that the arts funding got lumped into this. KC needs a nationally known performing arts center to continue regaining its status as a national destination.

If it were just the stadium funding, I would vote no. I have seen renderings of the projected improvements and they are not worth 2/3 the cost of building a new stadium. Just wait a few years and bring the royals downtown in a new facility down the street from the arena for just $100M more.

As it stands now I'm still undecided. I voted "not voting" forgetting that this issue was on the back of my absentee ballot.

Leave the K where the K is, take that $100 mil and build around the Truman Sports complex, a lot of stuff is happening down the 70 corridor which is starting to bring all of the venues that people have been screaming for. The new Bass Pro complex (including a hotel), will be a great addition to the area and a great place for fans to stay.

A shuttle bus system running between the complex and say Blue Springs Expressway would be a great way of moving fans to the various restaurants, bars and hotels popping up all along this corridor.

cookster50
10-11-2004, 08:16 AM
Definitely a NO. If they put an ending date on it, I would consider it. But I can see this tax being a never ending tax that everyone will regret 15 years from now.

BigRedChief
10-11-2004, 08:25 AM
This poll is worthless without a Gaz option.

BigRedChief
10-11-2004, 08:27 AM
No, this is a revitalization project for both stadiums. They want $238 million from taxpayers. They also both want new stadiums at some point in the future.

I agree and soon. Probably 2015 we will start to hear it from the Royals and Chiefs.

shaneo69
10-11-2004, 08:42 AM
I think I read somewhere that the tax would cost the average KC family an estimated $94 per year.

Who will get more value from the stadium improvements, the fan who gets more toilets and concession stands, or the owner who gets more income from new luxury boxes and higher ticket prices? Does the owner profit enough from the improvements to cover the costs himself?

You've already got football owners looking to move in San Diego, Oakland, and Minnesota. LA can't get its crap together and build a stadium. Where would Hunt move the team if he didn't get the stadium improvements? It took four years to move the Expos. Where would Glass move the Royals?

KC Jones
10-11-2004, 09:34 AM
The problem with our stadiums isn't just revenue generating potential from luxury suites. It's also 30+ year old plumbing, wiring, etc.

However I'm opposed to the crappy job they've done of tacking on free money for the Chiefs and Royals. I think someone had the bright idea that if you put the Chiefs on the ticket the vote would pass and that would be the only way to get bistate through. I'd have preferred just voting for the performing arts package alone. Now I'm not sure which way I'll vote.

I'm leaning towards no because I feel like this is a frankenstein tax that hasn't been well thought out.

KCN
10-11-2004, 10:01 AM
I'm not even sure exactly what the arts package is. The PAC is being built regardless. It would have been nice to give voters a better idea of what we're actually voting on.

htismaqe
10-11-2004, 10:37 AM
I think I read somewhere that the tax would cost the average KC family an estimated $94 per year.

Who will get more value from the stadium improvements, the fan who gets more toilets and concession stands, or the owner who gets more income from new luxury boxes and higher ticket prices? Does the owner profit enough from the improvements to cover the costs himself?

You've already got football owners looking to move in San Diego, Oakland, and Minnesota. LA can't get its crap together and build a stadium. Where would Hunt move the team if he didn't get the stadium improvements? It took four years to move the Expos. Where would Glass move the Royals?

Just an FYI -- I'm in no way suggesting that KC would be the same -- it's NOT a coincidence that the biggest spenders in free agency over the last few years (Denver, Washington, etc.) have new stadiums with TONS of luxury boxes.

Mark M
10-11-2004, 10:46 AM
I could be mistaken (my mind has some... uh, flaws), but I believe in Lamar's interview on Keitz's show last week he said there wouldn't be a significant increase in luxury boxes in Arrowhead.

You're right -- Lamar is more concerned about more conessions, bathrooms and other fan amenities (sp?). It'd be hard to add more luxury boxes.

IIRC, they also want to add a restaurant and Chiefs HOF that would bring people down there during the offseason. The Packers did that at Lambeau and it's worked great.

MM
~~:arrow:

ChiefsCountry
10-11-2004, 11:25 AM
The Chiefs and Royals just want to update the stadiums just like Green Bay did. If I lived in KC I would have no problem with that. Now I have a problem paying for that stupid Dome in St. Louis though.

Sig Kauffman
10-11-2004, 11:54 AM
IIRC, they also want to add a restaurant and Chiefs HOF that would bring people down there during the offseason. The Packers did that at Lambeau and it's worked great.

MM
~~:arrow:

That would be awesome...not everyone loves football, but everyone loves to eat, so it would be a good reason for people to visit Arrowhead.

gblowfish
10-11-2004, 12:03 PM
by the way, do they still play baseball on a professional level in this city? :hmmm:
Sure...they're called the "T-Bones" and they're in the Northern Independent League.
Blowfish is torn on this issue:
Positives: My wife is an art teacher. Lots of schools cut their arts and music programs, but still provide new jerseys and helmets to the football team. So seeing money go for both arts and sports could be a positive thing. Also, I live just ten minutes north of the stadiums, and I like where they are just fine. Easy in, easy out, lotsa parking, and both stadiums are beauties. They could be "classics" one day like Soldier Field and Wrigley Field.
Negatives: Chiefs don't really need the money. They have a "contingency" or "slush" fund line item in the money that would come to them. They should spend all the windfalls on fan amenities, like more bathrooms or enclosing the concourse for some warmth on cold days. Instead it'll mostly go to fat cat stuff and building more ways to sell crap (consessions, souveniers, etc). I'm going to have to hear more on both sides before I decide.

BigRedChief
10-11-2004, 12:28 PM
Sure...they're called the "T-Bones" and they're in the Northern Independent League.
Blowfish is torn on this issue:
Positives: My wife is an art teacher. Lots of schools cut their arts and music programs, but still provide new jerseys and helmets to the football team. So seeing money go for both arts and sports could be a positive thing. It's that way because thats the way the public wants it to be. They care about their Friday Football Nights more than they do about the inner artistic lights. You should go see the complex that Lee's Summit built for the new High School. It's like a mid-major college set up.

Example my son is in the 7th grade. He is big, mean and tough on the football field. 10 tackles, QB sack etc per game. No one can block him. The High School football coach stopped by a 7th grade practice scrimmage to check him and another kid out that he had heard about.

Do you think the Art teachers are hearing about the artistic kids in the pipeline? Don't get me wrong here. I don't think its right. It just is what it is.

gblowfish
10-11-2004, 04:06 PM
It's that way because thats the way the public wants it to be. They care about their Friday Football Nights more than they do about the inner artistic lights. You should go see the complex that Lee's Summit built for the new High School. It's like a mid-major college set up. Do you think the Art teachers are hearing about the artistic kids in the pipeline? Don't get me wrong here. I don't think its right. It just is what it is.

Lee's Summit North (I think that's the school you're talking about) also has a beautiful theater and college quality art rooms for sculpture, painting, etc. They have nice stuff because they're a rich district. Other school districts not so well off are laying off fine arts teachers and making students pay for extra activities (including sports, speech and debate, art field trips, etc). About ten years ago my wife won a good sized National art grant for her kids to pay for supplies and field trips to the Nelson and to the St. Louis Art Gallery. Instead of being excited for the art kids, the principal of the school asked my wife to donate the grant to the sports booster club to buy new helmets and shoulder pads for the Junior High Football team. Now that sucks, and she told him to stuff it.

Music and art develops creative thinking and problem solving, and creative thinking applies to all professions. Art Studies is a basic for architechs, interior designers, automotive and aerospace engineers, commercial and graphic artists, etc. There's a whole building complex full of Hallmark Employees who owe thanks to their art teachers for having jobs today.

Anyway, I'd be more inclined to vote for BiState if it were for the arts only. I have serious reservations about Lamar Hunt getting a slush fund from the taxpayers. OK, I'm done ranting now.

RedDread
10-11-2004, 04:10 PM
I already voted yes, whether my vote gets counted or not remains to be seen.

KingPriest2
10-11-2004, 04:48 PM
There's actually good reason for that too...anyone hear about how the Minnesota Twins had to stop their game in the 11th inning or so so they could convert the dome into football for the Gophers.

link?

Sig Kauffman
10-24-2004, 01:40 PM
bump...the election is now just 9 days away. More than 51 people have to have an opinion.

patteeu
10-24-2004, 03:01 PM
Nope. I'm still waiting for the first BiState tax to pay for itself.

wazu
10-24-2004, 03:51 PM
Hell, yes! I plan on living here for a long time, and I love the Chiefs and the Royals. Just about anything either of these teams puts on the ballot, I will support.

Phobia
10-24-2004, 04:09 PM
Hell, yes! I plan on living here for a long time, and I love the Chiefs and the Royals. Just about anything either of these teams puts on the ballot, I will support.

You really should read up on the proposition, Adam. You're smarter than this.

2bikemike
10-24-2004, 04:15 PM
If I lived there I would probably vote for it. Of course I don't have a clue as to the real meat and potatoes of the measure.

Sig Kauffman
10-30-2004, 09:14 AM
it's the last weekend before we head to the polls and vote...so let's hear what you think!

dtebbe
10-30-2004, 09:30 AM
I don't live in KC, but if I did I would vote yes. History shows when teams don't get the new staidum or improvements they want, they leave. So in short, if you want the Chiefs and Royals in KC vote yes.

DT

Saulbadguy
10-30-2004, 09:31 AM
I can't vote in it, but if I could i'd vote yes.

lurker king
10-30-2004, 12:24 PM
I don't live in kc but my brother does & he is voting yes mostly because of the arts that will be helped.

Sig Kauffman
10-31-2004, 03:35 PM
only a few hours left to vote on the poll...I'd love to know what everyone thinks

patteeu
11-01-2004, 11:06 AM
I don't live in kc but my brother does & he is voting yes mostly because of the arts that will be helped.

Is he gay?

KCN
11-01-2004, 11:08 AM
Is he gay?

You don't have to be gay to realize that a decent arts scene is key for any healthy city.

Sig Kauffman
11-01-2004, 06:15 PM
just a few hours left!

grandllama
11-01-2004, 06:17 PM
I can't vote in it, but if I could i'd vote yes.

ditto... Keitzman today saying that the concourse outside his seats was plenty wide enough. Boy he doesn't get out of that luxury suite very often does he. Yesterday was hell on the concourses.

patteeu
11-01-2004, 07:52 PM
You don't have to be gay to realize that a decent arts scene is key for any healthy city.

Of course you don't, but it helps. :D

I was just curious.

BTW, what specific arts initiatives are going to be funded? I hope we don't end up with some more million dollar "sculptures" like those hideous things on top of Bartle Hall.

Saulbadguy
11-01-2004, 07:57 PM
ditto... Keitzman today saying that the concourse outside his seats was plenty wide enough. Boy he doesn't get out of that luxury suite very often does he. Yesterday was hell on the concourses.
It wouldn't be as bad if people wouldn't congregate in the middle of the fvcking concourse. :cuss:

VonneMarie
11-01-2004, 08:00 PM
I'm changing my vote to yes, plus the arts really need it.

Randallflagg
11-01-2004, 09:41 PM
As you can tell from my name, I have voted NO (early voting in Johnson County). Why? Simple. Both the Chiefs and the Royals have made literally millions off this city for years. Is it too much to ask that they pony up a larger share of the "investment?" Just my opinion....

VonneMarie
11-01-2004, 09:43 PM
As you can tell from my name, I have voted NO (early voting in Johnson County). Why? Simple. Both the Chiefs and the Royals have made literally millions off this city for years. Is it too much to ask that they pony up a larger share of the "investment?" Just my opinion....
Did you not think of the arts?

beavis
11-01-2004, 09:49 PM
You don't have to be gay to realize that a decent arts scene is key for any healthy city.
I don't have a problem with it, but I don't like how non specific they are about where the money will go. All I've ever heard anyone say is that it will go to "the arts". What the hell does that mean?

That being said, I've yet to talk to a person that has said they are voting for this thing. I think it's probably going down in flames. Prepare for the "Royals are leaving KC" talk to start soon after. I'll throw a shit fit the first time someone brings it up with the Chiefs though. If there has ever been a team that didn't have a case for picking up and leaving, it's KC.

Randallflagg
11-01-2004, 10:07 PM
Did you not think of the arts?

Absolutely! The Arts Center is going to be built regardless! Kaufman is putting something like $150 million to build it. So, as a working musician, yes! I did consider the arts. I have been waiting for an arts center in Kansas City for as long as I could remember and am glad that it is going to be built. Look...I would be all for it if the teams themselves were contributing more of their own money.

This reminds me of the original Bi State (Union Station). I was completely in favor of every aspect of it until it came to the "Science City" deal. My Brother lives in Louisville and they tried the same thing. Put a boatload of money into their Science City only to watch it go "belly up" a few years later....

Now, before you go ballistic on me...I am a season ticket holder for both the Royal and the Chiefs and love them both. That doesn't make what is being planned here necessarily the "right" thing....again, only my opinion.

VonneMarie
11-01-2004, 10:13 PM
You believe that?

sparkky
11-01-2004, 11:40 PM
I'm voting no. We need a downtown baseball park to help get downtown going again. Chiefs are good where they are. We can't afford to replace both stadiums at the same time so we do Royals now and Chiefs later.
Also want some $$$$$ from St. Louis. We've built enough shit in their town.
Pro sports teams bring people into town to spend money and keep KC on the national map. I have my doubts that ballet, opera and museums do this. Separate the sports from the arts.

grandllama
11-01-2004, 11:44 PM
I have my doubts that ballet, opera and museums do this. Separate the sports from the arts.

There is a hole in this logic. My entire family sans me hates sports, especially football, yet they travel the country to go to cultural events above and beyond what Salina, KS provides. Right now they go to Denver 2 - 3 times as much as KC.

CASHMAN
11-01-2004, 11:46 PM
YES....




CASHMAN.

grandllama
11-01-2004, 11:47 PM
Look...I would be all for it if the teams themselves were contributing more of their own money.


Do you put in a ton of money into an apartment you don't own? No, you may put a little here or there when its a small enough problem that you don't need to call the landlord, but when the roof caves in, by God, its time to call the landlord and make him do something about it.

The Chiefs and Royals do not own those buildings. If either team leaves the city, those grand old buildings will still be there, waiting on new tenants to plop down a deposit and move in.

grandllama
11-01-2004, 11:48 PM
throw a shit fit the first time someone brings it up with the Chiefs though. If there has ever been a team that didn't have a case for picking up and leaving, it's KC.

Yep, neither did the Browns or Colts.

grandllama
11-01-2004, 11:50 PM
It wouldn't be as bad if people wouldn't congregate in the middle of the fvcking concourse. :cuss:

Hell, between the lines snaking out of the bathrooms to the back of the concorse and the lines from the concessions doing the same, I couldn't even get to the back of the concorse to have a smoke...

grandllama
11-01-2004, 11:51 PM
Of course you don't, but it helps. :D

I was just curious.

BTW, what specific arts initiatives are going to be funded? I hope we don't end up with some more million dollar "sculptures" like those hideous things on top of Bartle Hall.

I like those things on top of Bartle. They are unique, just like the shuttlecocks.

I personally think the sculptures in the JC Nichols fountain are simply revolting, but that doesn't stop it from being a KC Landmark.

Fairplay
11-02-2004, 01:05 AM
I would vote No on it. If for no other reason then the arts are on the ballot.

The arts know they wouldn't get a tax to help them. So gues what they tag on to something like the stadium issue. Which have nothing in common, to help them get money.

I can see helping the stadiums. But with that on the ballot as well there is no way i would vote yes.

Fairplay
11-02-2004, 01:07 AM
Absolutely! The Arts Center is going to be built regardless! Kaufman is putting something like $150 million to build it. So, as a working musician, yes! I did consider the arts. I have been waiting for an arts center in Kansas City for as long as I could remember and am glad that it is going to be built. Look...I would be all for it if the teams themselves were contributing more of their own money.








Go to San Fran dude that city gives the most to the arts. You will feel right at home, enjoy!

tk13
11-02-2004, 01:33 AM
This is probably going to die hard. Not that I can vote on it, but I'd have a hard time voting for it if the teams are going to want a new stadium soon. If this fails I think it may come to that pretty quickly... sad part is that both Arrowhead and the K are two of the best stadiums in their respective leagues and the people of KC probably don't appreciate it as much as they should. Personally, I'd rather revamp what's there as opposed to building anything new. Plus, I really want to see the Royals be able to bring in that extra revenue, they need all the help they can get, and I don't think David Glass losing 30-40 million dollars a year to put a winning team on the field is the way to go like half the idiots in KC. I do think there is some merit to the argument that says professional sports are what makes KC a "bigger name" city than somewhere like Tulsa or Oklahoma City. I would be pretty crushed if either the Chiefs or Royals left town...

Randallflagg
11-02-2004, 02:01 AM
Go to San Fran dude that city gives the most to the arts. You will feel right at home, enjoy!

I'm not gay, assmunch. You want to vote for it - go ahead. I've already voted and Damn glad I voted no.

KcMizzou
11-02-2004, 03:06 AM
This is probably going to die hard. Not that I can vote on it, but I'd have a hard time voting for it if the teams are going to want a new stadium soon. If this fails I think it may come to that pretty quickly... sad part is that both Arrowhead and the K are two of the best stadiums in their respective leagues and the people of KC probably don't appreciate it as much as they should. Personally, I'd rather revamp what's there as opposed to building anything new. Plus, I really want to see the Royals be able to bring in that extra revenue, they need all the help they can get, and I don't think David Glass losing 30-40 million dollars a year to put a winning team on the field is the way to go like half the idiots in KC. I do think there is some merit to the argument that says professional sports are what makes KC a "bigger name" city than somewhere like Tulsa or Oklahoma City. I would be pretty crushed if either the Chiefs or Royals left town... I love the stadiums we have now. I love the fact that they're easy to get to, and I love the stadiums in general. They were both way ahead of their time.

Glass "losing 30-40 million a year to put a winning team on the field" just won't happen. He's a business man. Either we'll find a way to help the Royals, or they will eventually be forced to leave.

And yeah... it'd kill me to see either team leave. KC is my home.

My employer is starting up a branch in Colorado, and they're looking for people who are willing to transfer. I honestly don't think I could do it. I've never lived anywhere else, and I love this area. Anything we can do to help KC in general, is alright in my book.

Fairplay
11-02-2004, 03:18 AM
I'm not gay, assmunch. You want to vote for it - go ahead. I've already voted and Damn glad I voted no.




Did i say that, umm no.

beavis
11-02-2004, 08:22 AM
Yep, neither did the Browns or Colts.
Does that make it right?

Lamar makes millions in profit from the Chiefs every year, and he wants a handout from taxpayers? Sorry, I love football, but not enough to stuff the pockets of a millionaire with my hard earned money.

KCN
11-02-2004, 08:30 AM
I don't have a problem with it, but I don't like how non specific they are about where the money will go. All I've ever heard anyone say is that it will go to "the arts". What the hell does that mean?

I definitely hear you there. Even though I voted yes, I will have no problem if this fails.

BTW...There is talk of Bi-State III coming up around the corner. This one will be geared toward transportation, and possibly commuter rail to downtown from JoCo. This one will need your support, so if anyone wants to throw BSII to the curb, be my guest.

KCN
11-02-2004, 08:38 AM
The arts know they wouldn't get a tax to help them. So gues what they tag on to something like the stadium issue. Which have nothing in common, to help them get money.

I see it the opposite....I think the arts package was tacked on just so more people would vote yes for the stadiums. That's the only reason I voted yes.

At this point in KC growth, the arts need strong support, even if you have no interest in them. Artistic types are moving into downtown and the crossroads district and are having a GIANT impact on revitalizing that area, including the area immediately adjacent to the soon-to-be arena and entertainment district. They will be the difference between a lively, healthy downtown, or a St. Louis atmosphere where you go to a game at the arena and then go home because it's dead around it.

Note that I'm not necessarily saying to vote for BSII because of that, because it's a very unorganized plan. But the arts do need support if KC is to get back on the map.

Mark M
11-02-2004, 09:20 AM
I will be voting yes on this issue.

Those that vote no have very, very valid reasons for doing so. But if you do, you have no right to complain about long lines and crowded conditions at the stadiums, about the lack of any culture in KC, or about the Royals not being able to compete.

MM
~~:)

Mark M
11-02-2004, 09:23 AM
Does that make it right?

Lamar makes millions in profit from the Chiefs every year, and he wants a handout from taxpayers? Sorry, I love football, but not enough to stuff the pockets of a millionaire with my hard earned money.
Um ... sorry, but the taxpayers paid millions to build the stadiums to begin with. Shouldn't they also pay to help improve them? Hell, it's only a freaking dime a day.

And every time you buy a ticket to the game or merchandise you're stuffing the pockets of a millionaire. So unless you don't go to the games or buy any merchandise, you're already "stuffing" their pockets.

MM
~~:shrug:

Sig Kauffman
11-02-2004, 01:26 PM
thanks everyone who voted! Obviously the results aren't scientific in any way, shape or form. The big mistake I made was putting "not voting" as an option. "Not voting" was supposed to mean you really don't care about this particular vote. I didn't stop to think that someone in St. Joseph or Des Moines would mark "not voting" because they can't, so there was the big flaw. Thanks just the same! :thumb:

VonneMarie
11-02-2004, 01:35 PM
I will be voting yes on this issue.

Those that vote no have very, very valid reasons for doing so. But if you do, you have no right to complain about long lines and crowded conditions at the stadiums, about the lack of any culture in KC, or about the Royals not being able to compete.

MM
~~:)
Thank you for voting for the arts!

grandllama
11-02-2004, 02:21 PM
Does that make it right?.

right and reality are two very distinctly different animals...

penguinz
11-02-2004, 02:32 PM
I'll vote no. When the state starts giving me money to improve the facilities at my business, I'll vote yes.

I have more reasons that just that, but I don't really feel like getting into it while I'm watching the games.I am sorry but this is an ignorant argument against it. Is the building your business is in a publically owned structure? No. Are the buildings the Chiefs and Royals play in publically owned? Yes.

Logical
11-02-2004, 05:31 PM
Hopefully the KC area folks will keep us posted on the results of this tax.

Brock
11-02-2004, 05:41 PM
Um ... sorry, but the taxpayers paid millions to build the stadiums to begin with. Shouldn't they also pay to help improve them?


I'm sorry, where's the logic?

Fairplay
11-02-2004, 05:54 PM
I'm sorry, where's the logic?




I agree. I don't understand the logic in that. If someone built me a new house and gave it to me. I wouldn't expect them to maintain the house as well.

VonneMarie
11-02-2004, 06:43 PM
Hopefully the KC area folks will keep us posted on the results of this tax.
They should start rollin' in the results at 7:20 ct.

Phobia
11-02-2004, 06:55 PM
I am sorry but this is an ignorant argument against it. Is the building your business is in a publically owned structure? No. Are the buildings the Chiefs and Royals play in publically owned? Yes.

I know it is. Certainly, that wasn't my primary reason for voting no. I think I've chimed in several times since that first post.

VonneMarie
11-02-2004, 07:23 PM
55% NO 44% YES 18% REPORTING

grandllama
11-02-2004, 07:28 PM
As of 7:27pm

Jackson County 53% NO 46% YES
Clay County 53% NO 46% YES

Phobia
11-02-2004, 07:30 PM
As of 7:27pm

Jackson County 53% NO 46% YES
Clay County 53% NO 46% YES

That's a LOT closer than I figured. I thought it would be a double digit swing.

grandllama
11-02-2004, 07:49 PM
That's a LOT closer than I figured. I thought it would be a double digit swing. Bi State Tax Jackson County Question 1CandidateVotesPercentWinnerYes 36,27361%http://images.ibsys.com/2000/0905/65680.gifNo 22,34638%http://images.ibsys.com/2000/0905/65680.gifPrecincts Reporting - 27%
http://images.ibsys.com/sh/images/weather/spacer.gif
http://images.ibsys.com/sh/images/weather/electionbar.gif

VonneMarie
11-02-2004, 07:58 PM
I think it's safe to say that BSII has failed.

Demonpenz
11-02-2004, 08:00 PM
Start Printing off Branson Royals T-shirts

jcroft
11-02-2004, 08:08 PM
I don't have time to read this thread. Can someone fill me in? Looks like this is likley to NOT pass? Is that right?

VonneMarie
11-02-2004, 08:09 PM
Wait, wait...

Bi-State Tax
Bi State Tax Clay County Question 1
Candidate Votes
Yes 29,064 47%
No 32,376 52%
Precincts Reporting - 68%

Bi State Tax Jackson County Question 1
Candidate Votes
Yes 80,124 57%
No 58,854 42%
Precincts Reporting - 30%

Bi State Tax Johnson County Question 1
Candidate Votes
Yes 53,883 50%
No 53,883 50%
Precincts Reporting - 24%

As of 8:10 pm.

jcroft
11-02-2004, 08:12 PM
Thanks, Vonnie!

grandllama
11-02-2004, 08:13 PM
Start Printing off Branson Royals T-shirts

Don't forget the LA Chiefs t's

VonneMarie
11-02-2004, 08:15 PM
Don't forget the LA Chiefs t's
Chiefs aren't going anywhere, the Royals, now that's a different story.

grandllama
11-02-2004, 08:15 PM
It has officially been defeated in Platte Co.

52% - 47% 100% reporting.

grandllama
11-02-2004, 08:16 PM
Chiefs aren't going anywhere, the Royals, now that's a different story.

Yeah, thats what they said in Cleveland.

VonneMarie
11-02-2004, 08:16 PM
It has officially been defeated in Platte Co.

52% - 47% 100% reporting.
No one cares about them, they aren't the BIG THREE. :p

Demonpenz
11-02-2004, 08:17 PM
the chiefs are more likely to move IMO.

Demonpenz
11-02-2004, 08:17 PM
It has officially been defeated in Platte Co.

52% - 47% 100% reporting.


I wonder how the water tower voted

VonneMarie
11-02-2004, 08:18 PM
Chiefs aren't movin', the Royals are more likely to move.

Demonpenz
11-02-2004, 08:19 PM
chiefs would be easier to move

grandllama
11-02-2004, 08:23 PM
Doesn't look like its going to make it in Clay Co... 75% reporting still 52% NO 47% YES

grandllama
11-02-2004, 08:35 PM
Channel 9 is projecting.... drum roll

BISTATE II - Failed.

VonneMarie
11-02-2004, 08:36 PM
It's dead.

Yes 38,950 47%
No 43,588 52%
Precincts Reporting - 89%

Bi State Tax Jackson County Question 1
Candidate Votes Percent Winner
Yes 84,428 57%
No 61,763 42%
Precincts Reporting - 42%

Bi State Tax Johnson County Question 1
Candidate Votes Percent Winner
Yes 53,883 50%
No 53,883 50%
Precincts Reporting - 24%

TOD 8:36 pm.

Spott
11-02-2004, 08:41 PM
Lamar and Carl should have to pay for it themselves. They've been gouging us Chiefs fans for years with higher ticket prices, parking, etc. every year since CP took over.

VonneMarie
11-02-2004, 08:43 PM
**** that. I was in it for the arts.

I do agree those greedy owners should pay for it themselves.

jcroft
11-02-2004, 08:47 PM
That's too bad, I think. I'm well out of the voting district, so I can't really complain (since I didn't vote), but I do think this needed to pass. I don't think it was perfect by any means, but it sounds to me like if we don't get BISTATE II, we aren't going to get much of anything for the stadiums and arts. That sucks.

Demonpenz
11-02-2004, 08:51 PM
The only thing i hope is that if a good well written tax comes along, people actually vote yes for it.

Phobia
11-02-2004, 08:54 PM
The only thing i hope is that if a good well written tax comes along, people actually vote yes for it.

I'd be all over that. I can't believe how poorly this one was conceived and presented. Hell, if the Chiefs hadn't gone on a 2 game win streak, it wouldn't have been close.

tk13
11-02-2004, 08:57 PM
Well I guess that's not unexpected. I expect, and hope, a movement for a new stadium will start soon. It's a tough call, fans don't want to pay for that stuff, and I understand where the owners come from too... they don't own the stadiums and it doesn't always make sense to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on something you do not own. David Glass would probably be dead before he was able to finish paying off these improvements, unless he pockets the money and doesn't raise payroll through the extra revenue generated, which defeats the purpose of the whole thing in the first place.... it's a shame that the Royals have to suffer because A) they're forced to play in a league of owners who have no concern for competitive balance and B) they have to work hand in hand with the Chiefs who are obviously worth a lot more money and people really don't think they need the help, which they might not, but I think it hurts the Royals. I think the Chiefs might be a few years away from needing some help depending on how many of these new money-making stadiums come into the league, but I really was hoping the Royals could catch a break here.... especially with as much bitching as I see about them not being able to retain enough players.

OPChief
11-02-2004, 09:33 PM
Hell No. What a joke.

Bowser
11-02-2004, 09:36 PM
I voted yes. I thought that is what Phobia wanted.

Mark M
11-03-2004, 07:34 AM
**** that. I was in it for the arts.That's why it got my vote.

But, apparently, a majority of people in the KC area are against paying $3 a f**king month so their children can get better art education.

I guess the back of the kids' menu at Applebee's is enough for some folks ... or Jamie Farr at the New Theatre Restaurant.

:sulk:
I do agree those greedy owners should pay for it themselves.
Yes and no. They don't own the stadiums, so I can understand why they don't want to pay to fix them. Maybe the county can sell the stadiums to them and let them do what they want ... :hmmm:

I think it just comes down to the fact that a majority of people want to be a major league city with great stadiums. They just don't want to have to pay for it. Typical something-for-nothing mentality ...

MM
~~:shake: