Let’s start here: I love baseball, have been and will continue to be a Kansas City Royals and Chiefs fan, but I’m still going to vote no on the downtown ballpark proposal for a variety of reasons, starting with their poorly thought-out campaign to convince me to vote yes.
Elaine: I gotta appreciate any reader who will tell somebody else "fuck you" on my behalf. I've got some relatives I'd like you to speak to. And Vahe is pronounced "Vah-hay." Either that or I've been saying it wrong for a couple decades.
I'm curious as to how the vote will turn out. If I still lived in KC, I'd vote no. Since Missouri, in general, has a lengthy track record of ignoring voters wishes, I'm waiting to see if the ultimate vote (whether yea or nay) is adhered to. Also doesn't help that the 'vote yes' campaign has been spearheaded by a former DeSantis strategist (insert giggle here).
To round out your most excellent post, I'd like to add that the mystery assessment (completed by Burns & McDonald in 2022) is a matter of public record and Googleable. Since I started out as a 'maybe' vote, I determined that personal research was in order and started looking things up (which got me to a 'hell, no'). Burns&Mac did both stadiums at the same time; pronounced both 'satisfactory'; and the Kauffman actually has fewer listed defects than Arrowhead. The reports are readable by a lay person (like me) and include pictures. I also looked up 'concrete cancer' (which actually is a serious problem when it exists) to get the technical name, did a search of the reports and found zero references to it, and that is not the kind of problem Burns&Mac is likely to overlook.(particularly when the reposts included defects like "this 4' railing need to be tightened...).
Valerie, thanks for your research. My son noted that the "cancer of the concrete" argument was similar to "weapons of mass destruction" an excuse to get the ball rolling. If there is no concrete cancer then the only reason to do this is because somebody's making a lot of vague promises.
No. None of this passes the smell test. If either team was at all concerned about the well-being and economic health of the Kansas City area, the proposal for a vote would have been shelved while they got their stories straight. The parking explanation is pure unicorn shit. After making Jackson and Clay counties dance like marionettes over the plan, they suddenly change lanes like a toddler behind the wheel of a semi. Follow the money. Somebody with a white elephant piece of downtown real estate got the promise of a large packet of cash, a dozen roses, and a reach-around if the New Plan went through. Welcome to Kansas City. After fifty years in Jackson County, I now live in Platte County, so I can't vote. If I could, it'd be a solid no from me.
Oooooooh. FU, Lee??? How many times have you heard that in your life? Yet you're still here.
I will vote "NO" tomorrow. I tend to listen to those most affected by issues, in this case Crossroads business owners and low-wage workers. Neither can say the are getting a good deal because Sherman and his crew have committed to nothing, just vague promises. He's a businessman (and probably a good one given his wealth and status) but that's how one becomes rich - by making promises that can't be enforced and hold up in a court of law. Even if this afternoon the Royals had signed contracts giving everyone everything they wanted I would still vote "NO" because of the shitty way they handled all this. And I wouldn't trust them to effectively handle the contracts. And also, big, long-term projects like this typically go over budget by 20%. So the ballpark would cost $1.2B at a minimum.
If you do this for a living you gotta get used to people being upset and roll with it. I picked up 10 subscribers yesterday and the ballpark post had the highest viewership of anything I've done this year. All in all, not a bad day.
I'd vote "no" as well. New stadium deals rarely seem to work out well for the community compared to the pie-in-the-sky promises. In Cincy "Great American Ballpark" (gag) is nice but I still miss Riverfront.
Here in DC, RFK really wasn't designed for baseball and the new stadium is very nice and it did "revitalize" (i.e. gentrify) the area. They also seem to have the parking figured out as they now have lots of city cops directing traffic both before and after the game. It's slow, but not as slow as it was before, and fairly smooth. The key is to park with you car's nose-out in the garage as it's a LOT easier to ease your way forward into the line of cars leaving than it is to back out.
Finally, I am so very, very happy the owner of the Wizards and Caps didn't get to screw over DC and move to northern Virginia. Our clueless governor* bungled it and the local's reaction here in the northern VA 'burbs was not just "no" but "oh hell, NO." I ride the Metro (subway) past the spot where they'd put the new stadiums and there's no frelling way the Metro and the roads could handle the extra traffic. And the entire financial projection for the stadiums relied on things like local hotels completely filling up at $750 a night.
* he's a reactionary bigot (he replaced the area in the governor's mansion that had displays about the enslaved who built the mansion and the capitol with a yoga studio) who was such a poor businessman that Carlyle Group paid him to leave! But, he wore a red sweater vest so the press thought he was a moderate.
As you noted team promises rarely seem to work out as advertised. Been to both RFK and Nationals Park and there's an example of a team actually needing a ballpark upgrade. When I walked into RFK my first reaction was, "This looks like a stadium a Latin American dictator would use for executions."
Fair enough. If this helps (and it may not) I never think of what I do as telling anyone else what to think. I'm telling them what I think and if that's persuasive, great; if not, that's OK too. In the meantime, I'll do my best to keep up the ribaldry.
IMHO a future plan should include working with the powers that be (across state lines) to make sure there will be some reasonable way of getting to the ballpark that does not involve parking, such as your " public buses, shuttles from distant parking lots, ride-share services, bikes, wagon trains, camel caravans, skateboards, jet packs, hot air balloons, hang gliders, sky diving, pogo sticks and whatever that thing was on the Starship Enterprise" (I went to games at Wrigley Field on the "L")
An improvement in public transportation would be welcome for a lot of reasons. Too bad they tore out the street car system that they now have to rebuild. That might seem like a waste, but somebody made money both times.
It's just that like you wanting to buy a new car. The salesman says sign here. You ask what about the price? The salesman says just take it and drive it for a month and then we'll tell you the price. Meanwhile you have sold your old car.
I'm an Astros fan and I can tell you that parking in downtown Houston on gameday is a hassle and is also expensive. I've been to many Astros games at Minute Maid Park with my dad.
Well, the people have spoken. I found it odd that the YES folks were gathered at J Riegers in the East Bottoms, to celebrate their victory, not at one of the businesses in the Crossroads that supported them. Oh, wait - there wasn’t one.
I was at the Stand Up KC Vote No rally yesterday at noon at the Election Board on MLK Blvd. The election board people came out and told us we couldn’t park in the lot (it’s a huge lot with lots of stores surrounding it). Security was called and told us to move and also to stay off the grass. As the rally progressed the cops showed up, about 4 squad cars. Everything was civil. The rally went on. Afterwards many of us went into the Election Board and voted NO.
That's a bit harsh. I started as a 'maybe', ended up as a 'no', but I consider the reasoning behind everyone who tells me they're voting 'yes' and take it into account. Hopefully, you've checked out how much of what Lee's saying is accurate and your 'yes' vote is a well informed vote... (and I'd absolutely vote 'yes' to extend the current tax)
I'd vote no if I lived in KCMO. And to the commenter who's canceling his sub: no, fuck YOU.
Also, I've always wondered how Vahe Gregorian's first name is pronounced.
Elaine: I gotta appreciate any reader who will tell somebody else "fuck you" on my behalf. I've got some relatives I'd like you to speak to. And Vahe is pronounced "Vah-hay." Either that or I've been saying it wrong for a couple decades.
I'm curious as to how the vote will turn out. If I still lived in KC, I'd vote no. Since Missouri, in general, has a lengthy track record of ignoring voters wishes, I'm waiting to see if the ultimate vote (whether yea or nay) is adhered to. Also doesn't help that the 'vote yes' campaign has been spearheaded by a former DeSantis strategist (insert giggle here).
The Star has an editorial about a racist mailer that claims liberals are trying to take away the Chiefs. Sounds like familiar tactics.
To round out your most excellent post, I'd like to add that the mystery assessment (completed by Burns & McDonald in 2022) is a matter of public record and Googleable. Since I started out as a 'maybe' vote, I determined that personal research was in order and started looking things up (which got me to a 'hell, no'). Burns&Mac did both stadiums at the same time; pronounced both 'satisfactory'; and the Kauffman actually has fewer listed defects than Arrowhead. The reports are readable by a lay person (like me) and include pictures. I also looked up 'concrete cancer' (which actually is a serious problem when it exists) to get the technical name, did a search of the reports and found zero references to it, and that is not the kind of problem Burns&Mac is likely to overlook.(particularly when the reposts included defects like "this 4' railing need to be tightened...).
Links to both reports can be found here: https://www.kmbc.com/article/engineering-study-says-kauffman-stadium-is-in-satisfactory-condition/60000213
Valerie, thanks for your research. My son noted that the "cancer of the concrete" argument was similar to "weapons of mass destruction" an excuse to get the ball rolling. If there is no concrete cancer then the only reason to do this is because somebody's making a lot of vague promises.
This is classic Lee Judge. It rolls like thunder off a mountaintop.
Thanks, I now feel like a Thor the Thunder God. On the other hand: critics might note that shit rolls downhill.
No. None of this passes the smell test. If either team was at all concerned about the well-being and economic health of the Kansas City area, the proposal for a vote would have been shelved while they got their stories straight. The parking explanation is pure unicorn shit. After making Jackson and Clay counties dance like marionettes over the plan, they suddenly change lanes like a toddler behind the wheel of a semi. Follow the money. Somebody with a white elephant piece of downtown real estate got the promise of a large packet of cash, a dozen roses, and a reach-around if the New Plan went through. Welcome to Kansas City. After fifty years in Jackson County, I now live in Platte County, so I can't vote. If I could, it'd be a solid no from me.
Following the money is always a good idea. Somebody is going to make a killing if this goes through.
Oooooooh. FU, Lee??? How many times have you heard that in your life? Yet you're still here.
I will vote "NO" tomorrow. I tend to listen to those most affected by issues, in this case Crossroads business owners and low-wage workers. Neither can say the are getting a good deal because Sherman and his crew have committed to nothing, just vague promises. He's a businessman (and probably a good one given his wealth and status) but that's how one becomes rich - by making promises that can't be enforced and hold up in a court of law. Even if this afternoon the Royals had signed contracts giving everyone everything they wanted I would still vote "NO" because of the shitty way they handled all this. And I wouldn't trust them to effectively handle the contracts. And also, big, long-term projects like this typically go over budget by 20%. So the ballpark would cost $1.2B at a minimum.
If you do this for a living you gotta get used to people being upset and roll with it. I picked up 10 subscribers yesterday and the ballpark post had the highest viewership of anything I've done this year. All in all, not a bad day.
I'd vote "no" as well. New stadium deals rarely seem to work out well for the community compared to the pie-in-the-sky promises. In Cincy "Great American Ballpark" (gag) is nice but I still miss Riverfront.
Here in DC, RFK really wasn't designed for baseball and the new stadium is very nice and it did "revitalize" (i.e. gentrify) the area. They also seem to have the parking figured out as they now have lots of city cops directing traffic both before and after the game. It's slow, but not as slow as it was before, and fairly smooth. The key is to park with you car's nose-out in the garage as it's a LOT easier to ease your way forward into the line of cars leaving than it is to back out.
Finally, I am so very, very happy the owner of the Wizards and Caps didn't get to screw over DC and move to northern Virginia. Our clueless governor* bungled it and the local's reaction here in the northern VA 'burbs was not just "no" but "oh hell, NO." I ride the Metro (subway) past the spot where they'd put the new stadiums and there's no frelling way the Metro and the roads could handle the extra traffic. And the entire financial projection for the stadiums relied on things like local hotels completely filling up at $750 a night.
* he's a reactionary bigot (he replaced the area in the governor's mansion that had displays about the enslaved who built the mansion and the capitol with a yoga studio) who was such a poor businessman that Carlyle Group paid him to leave! But, he wore a red sweater vest so the press thought he was a moderate.
As you noted team promises rarely seem to work out as advertised. Been to both RFK and Nationals Park and there's an example of a team actually needing a ballpark upgrade. When I walked into RFK my first reaction was, "This looks like a stadium a Latin American dictator would use for executions."
My wife and I are big “YESSES”…and we’ll keep paying for your hilarious perspective and ribald humor, not for your guidance on our voting.
Fair enough. If this helps (and it may not) I never think of what I do as telling anyone else what to think. I'm telling them what I think and if that's persuasive, great; if not, that's OK too. In the meantime, I'll do my best to keep up the ribaldry.
IMHO a future plan should include working with the powers that be (across state lines) to make sure there will be some reasonable way of getting to the ballpark that does not involve parking, such as your " public buses, shuttles from distant parking lots, ride-share services, bikes, wagon trains, camel caravans, skateboards, jet packs, hot air balloons, hang gliders, sky diving, pogo sticks and whatever that thing was on the Starship Enterprise" (I went to games at Wrigley Field on the "L")
An improvement in public transportation would be welcome for a lot of reasons. Too bad they tore out the street car system that they now have to rebuild. That might seem like a waste, but somebody made money both times.
It's just that like you wanting to buy a new car. The salesman says sign here. You ask what about the price? The salesman says just take it and drive it for a month and then we'll tell you the price. Meanwhile you have sold your old car.
They've been very vague which is one of the major reasons I'm voting no.
Best analogy I've heard.
My own correction: “usual” not “usually”
Happens the the best of us and I'm clearly not the best.
Well stated, Lee. Funny, too, as usually. Minor editing note, “spots” vs “lots” in your following text: only 9,000 existing multi-use parking lots
Good catch. If there were actually 9,000 parking "lots" that would solve one of the problems. That's what I get for writing at 4:30 AM.
I'm an Astros fan and I can tell you that parking in downtown Houston on gameday is a hassle and is also expensive. I've been to many Astros games at Minute Maid Park with my dad.
Well, the people have spoken. I found it odd that the YES folks were gathered at J Riegers in the East Bottoms, to celebrate their victory, not at one of the businesses in the Crossroads that supported them. Oh, wait - there wasn’t one.
I was at the Stand Up KC Vote No rally yesterday at noon at the Election Board on MLK Blvd. The election board people came out and told us we couldn’t park in the lot (it’s a huge lot with lots of stores surrounding it). Security was called and told us to move and also to stay off the grass. As the rally progressed the cops showed up, about 4 squad cars. Everything was civil. The rally went on. Afterwards many of us went into the Election Board and voted NO.
I’ll vote yes. I’ll be happy to cancel out your vote. And speaking of cancellation I’m done paying for your opinion. FU Lee
Your call. See you at the polls.
Aspirational voters don't take kindly to those who mess with their fantasies. Congrats on the 10 (net 9) new subs.
That's a bit harsh. I started as a 'maybe', ended up as a 'no', but I consider the reasoning behind everyone who tells me they're voting 'yes' and take it into account. Hopefully, you've checked out how much of what Lee's saying is accurate and your 'yes' vote is a well informed vote... (and I'd absolutely vote 'yes' to extend the current tax)