Here’s a demographic trivia question I don’t know the answer to…STLCityMike wrote:That is too bad. As much as we have to battle StL County, the Kansas side poaches quite a bit, and it is a different state, and carries a higher % of the populace than does our metro east.
The people of KC aren’t friendly towards people of St.Louis & all they hope for is the implosion of St.Louis. Anyways I could care less if the team moves to the state of Kansas maybe they’ll change the name to the Wichita Chiefs.delmar2debaliviere2downtown wrote:^My guess would be Quad Cities.
Is it bad for me as a person rooting for St. Louis to say this is a good thing for us if we ever want an NFL team? Makes the state more likely to back us in a bid later, wouldn’t it?
I mean all I have heard from Kansas City people regarding the NFL in the last several years is trolling St. Louis and saying it’s a dying city because StL lost a team. I’m not from here but that is a constant thing I head from KC folk. And after all, Chiefs just going across the river, not to another metro (maybe even closer to downtown?).
I could potentially see the Royals looking to relocate if they get a stadium deal blocked by the city again. City voters overwhelmingly blocked an extension of the sales tax that goes towards their sports teams last year. I have high doubts that the voters will suddenly accept a tax extension that just includes the Royals and not the Chiefs.delmar2debaliviere2downtown wrote: ↑Feb 27, 2025The location of the stadiums is pretty jarring. My first time going to KC it caught me off guard. It felt as if StL stadiums were in Earth City.
The Royals want to be downtown. It will be a matter of making the finances work. If they have many hurdles to overcome, then they might follow to Kansas.
I don’t think at this point KC has to worry about an out metro Royals relocation. Nashville could throw a hefty good looking deal at them, but I think at this point they are shooting for the 2 team MLB expansion or the White Sox ownership.
Last year’s vote failed because Jackson County was coming out of a disastrous property assessment mess, so people were upset at the county for having a sales tax renewal on the ballot when that was still ongoing. Royals didn’t help themselves either by choosing a site in the Crossroads that didn’t have neighborhood support (even though I thought it was the best site).Auggie wrote: ↑Feb 27, 2025I could potentially see the Royals looking to relocate if they get a stadium deal blocked by the city again. City voters overwhelmingly blocked an extension of the sales tax that goes towards their sports teams last year. I have high doubts that the voters will suddenly accept a tax extension that just includes the Royals and not the Chiefs.delmar2debaliviere2downtown wrote: ↑Feb 27, 2025The location of the stadiums is pretty jarring. My first time going to KC it caught me off guard. It felt as if StL stadiums were in Earth City.
The Royals want to be downtown. It will be a matter of making the finances work. If they have many hurdles to overcome, then they might follow to Kansas.
I don’t think at this point KC has to worry about an out metro Royals relocation. Nashville could throw a hefty good looking deal at them, but I think at this point they are shooting for the 2 team MLB expansion or the White Sox ownership.
If they don't need a public vote then yea it's pretty different. Most of the rhetoric i saw online was about subsidizing billionaires and stuff like that.Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Feb 27, 2025Last year’s vote failed because Jackson County was coming out of a disastrous property assessment mess, so people were upset at the county for having a sales tax renewal on the ballot when that was still ongoing. Royals didn’t help themselves either by choosing a site in the Crossroads that didn’t have neighborhood support (even though I thought it was the best site).Auggie wrote: ↑Feb 27, 2025I could potentially see the Royals looking to relocate if they get a stadium deal blocked by the city again. City voters overwhelmingly blocked an extension of the sales tax that goes towards their sports teams last year. I have high doubts that the voters will suddenly accept a tax extension that just includes the Royals and not the Chiefs.delmar2debaliviere2downtown wrote: ↑Feb 27, 2025The location of the stadiums is pretty jarring. My first time going to KC it caught me off guard. It felt as if StL stadiums were in Earth City.
The Royals want to be downtown. It will be a matter of making the finances work. If they have many hurdles to overcome, then they might follow to Kansas.
I don’t think at this point KC has to worry about an out metro Royals relocation. Nashville could throw a hefty good looking deal at them, but I think at this point they are shooting for the 2 team MLB expansion or the White Sox ownership.
The deal being worked on now wouldn’t involve a public vote. What that entails, I’m not sure yet. I imagine the City will issue some sort of bond that the Royals then pay back over a period of however many years through sales taxes on tickets, merchandise, and food and beverage sold at the stadium. If they develop a mixed-use development with this, I expect the special sales tax will be placed on items there too. We’ll see though.
If the Royals choose Washington Square Park for their stadium, I could see some sort of deal being made where the City owns the stadium/site, a sales tax exemption on construction materials is issued and when coupled with a bond of some sort, it could get done. It’s needlessly complicated (in my opinion).
Honestly I’m a bit shocked that the state isn’t fighting tooth and nail to keep the team within the state I mean it’s by far Missouri’s best team & the NFL best team within this decade but it doesn’t really surprise me Missouri literally isn’t a state that bats for its two biggest cities to achieve better nor has a real interest in seeing them prosper.framer wrote:Interesting how so many folks are lamenting the Chiefs going to Kansas (at the expense of Missouri sales taxes), yet most folks on this board seem hopeful for new growth on the Eastside (to re-center the population on Downtown).
Just an observation.
Which should be any Missourian with respect for themselves.JaneJacobsGhost wrote:It only matters in the minds of people who value pissing contests with the state of Kansas.
https://www.kcur.org/politics-elections ... plan-kcataThe Kansas City Area Transportation Authority is bracing for drastic cuts to service if Kansas City passes its proposed budget, according to documents obtained by KCUR.
To maintain the current status quo for its Kansas City operations — which already includes long wait times and the fewest bus routes the agency’s had in decades — the KCATA needs about $117 million. The city plans to give the agency $71 million in its 2025-2026 budget.
Without any more funding, KCATA will cut 13 of its 29 routes in Kansas City, Missouri. Those cuts would affect more than 6,500 people, about 18% of the city’s total weekday ridership.
You aren't still in KC? Where do you live now?Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Mar 12, 2025Fares should be brought back on the busses. All the busses do now is shuffle the homeless and mentally ill around 90% of the time. 10% of the time is actually moving people around who need to use the bus to get around. This has caused a serious quality of ridership decline. Put a fare back in place and this issue will decline and ridership will likely increase as passengers will know there’s less of a chance to deal with someone who might just ruin their ride.
When I lived in KCMO, I used the bus often to go from Downtown to the Plaza or Waldo. The number of times someone was having an episode, stinking up the bus, or asking for money was insane.
If KCATA moves forward with a ~50% cut, it will make the Kansas City MSA the worst served of America's 50 largest MSAs. Below graph is Vehicle Revenue Hours Per Capita, assuming a 50% cut from total VRH in 2024. This is total of all agencies in each MSA, not just the largest.quincunx wrote: ↑Mar 12, 2025I guess they can all take Ubers
KCUR - Kansas City will lose nearly half its bus routes under transit agency's drastic cost-cutting plan
https://www.kcur.org/politics-elections ... plan-kcataThe Kansas City Area Transportation Authority is bracing for drastic cuts to service if Kansas City passes its proposed budget, according to documents obtained by KCUR.
To maintain the current status quo for its Kansas City operations — which already includes long wait times and the fewest bus routes the agency’s had in decades — the KCATA needs about $117 million. The city plans to give the agency $71 million in its 2025-2026 budget.
Without any more funding, KCATA will cut 13 of its 29 routes in Kansas City, Missouri. Those cuts would affect more than 6,500 people, about 18% of the city’s total weekday ridership.
Wow, very interesting, never seen this before.addxb2 wrote: ↑Mar 12, 2025If KCATA moves forward with a ~50% cut, it will make the Kansas City MSA the worst served of America's 50 largest MSAs. Below graph is Vehicle Revenue Hours Per Capita, assuming a 50% cut from total VRH in 2024. This is total of all agencies in each MSA, not just the largest.quincunx wrote: ↑Mar 12, 2025I guess they can all take Ubers
KCUR - Kansas City will lose nearly half its bus routes under transit agency's drastic cost-cutting plan
https://www.kcur.org/politics-elections ... plan-kcataThe Kansas City Area Transportation Authority is bracing for drastic cuts to service if Kansas City passes its proposed budget, according to documents obtained by KCUR.
To maintain the current status quo for its Kansas City operations — which already includes long wait times and the fewest bus routes the agency’s had in decades — the KCATA needs about $117 million. The city plans to give the agency $71 million in its 2025-2026 budget.
Without any more funding, KCATA will cut 13 of its 29 routes in Kansas City, Missouri. Those cuts would affect more than 6,500 people, about 18% of the city’s total weekday ridership.
St. Louis receives 1.7 million vehicle revenue hours across multiple agencies.
PT_Per_Capita.jpg
