Saturday, March 25, 2017

TKC EXCLUSIVE AND BREAKING NEWS!!! KANSAS CITY QUESTION 3 SUPPORTERS DISTANCE THEMSELVES FROM MAYOR SLY AMID LAST DAYS OF GO BOND CAMPAIGN!!!



Here's a campaign move that' we've been talking about for about week and actually serves as a break from the junk mail that's clogging everyone's mailbox.

Two wit . . .

THE KANSAS CITY PET PROJECTS LOOKS TO DISTANCE ITSELF FROM THE DIVISIVE GO BOND CAMPAIGN AND MAYOR SLY A SLEW OF ANIMAL FRIENDLY EVENTS!!!

This one was put on blast earlier this week via social media:

KC Pet Project will hold a public rally for Question 3 at 1:30 p.m. Sunday at the J.C. Nichols Foundation on the Country Club Plaza.

Question 3 supporters haven't been happy with the junk mail focused campaign and look to step out from Mayor Sly's shadow.

Here is the KC Pet Project Campaign site with Sly and Troy pushed to the side of the frame . . .

Raisethewoofkc.org

Money line:

"Frankly, I don't care if Question 1 or 2 pass and I'd rather they didn't. But Kansas City really needs this animal shelter and there are a lot of people who have worked really hard for it. We're raising our own money for a separate campaign in the week leading up to the election and don't want (Mayor) Sly to be a part of it even though he and Troy keep trying to strong-arm us."

Junk mail might not be the best way to accomplish this aim and a doggie protest will grab the attention of a few TV cameras with cute puppies.

What's more important is the question of effectiveness of local pet lover campaign efforts . . .

WILL CUTE DOGGIES AND ARGUMENTS FOR A NEW ANIMAL SHELTER CONVINCE VOTERS TO SUPPORT FOR KANSAS CITY QUESTION 3???

You decide . . .

27 Comments:

No Go KC said...

I love dogs but 3/4ths of a billion over 40 years is too much for rover.

Sorry.

Anonymous said...

At this point, a lovable dog or even a filthy cat is a lot more convincing than any KC politician.

Anonymous said...

10:33: I haven't decided how to vote on this question, but I do know it's not a 3/4 billion dollar issue.

Anonymous said...

You are wrong. Do not just out lookout for your own special interest. These are bad proposals for Kansas City. The City will have to come back to voters with better proposals. Vote NO 1-2-3.

Anonymous said...

I thought the post from a week or so ago about "". Do we really need a new animal shelter" had a lot of good points and fact based information from neighboring animal shelters web sites. I find it hard to understand why the proposed KCPet Project will cost way more to operate than other area shelters handling more pets? Where's all that money going???

Anonymous said...

11:02 it's Kansas City, so it will be a lie loaded with pay offs.

Just vote NO on everything.

Anonymous said...

How many Tiny Homes could we build for disabled Veterans with the $30,000,000 going into this pet shelter? Then there is the $4,000,000 - $6,000,000 annual maintanence costs ? Too many unanswered questions..

Anonymous said...

I love my pets and I lookout for all animals when I can; at any other time I might consider voting yes JUST for an animal shelter and programs that assist them. BUT when these politicians deliberately put a feel good, apple pie and motherhood issue into the middle of an otherwise bad proposal just to get it all to pass...its a bait and switch moment....ALL must be voted no...VOTE NO on 1-2-3.

Also, I have now received 9, count them 9 flyers to support this boondoggle; how much $ has been wasted on this.

Anonymous said...

Close to $1,000,000.00

Anonymous said...

Vote for Question 3!

Dogs not nogs.

Anonymous said...


Vote no on 1,2,3, and 4.

If this bond passes you will be O.K. for the first year but after that the only way out would be arson.

No on 4, because they can't even get the schools right, why more taxes?????

Before anymore taxes make the city show where the dollars they have now are going!!!!

Anonymous said...

What's the salaries of these hens that run the thing? Probably close to 6 figure if not above, just like all of these non profits, it's all about raising money and salaries, the main mission is usually given very little thought

Anonymous said...

How about the City enforcing pet ownership regulations, thus reducing the number of pets who end up in shelters in the first place? Spay and Neuter and educating people about how to care for their pets would be money well spent. They can also spend some money on upgrading the current shelter. If City Hall acted like the money was coming out of THEIR pocket, they would spend more time figuring out a reasonable solution.

Anonymous said...

Troy fucking Schulte. What an asshat

Anonymous said...

^^^Your mother is an asshat.

Anonymous said...

^^^ So sad to see city hall employees forced to work on a saturday in order to support this garbage.

Defending Troy must be a lonely job.

Anonymous said...

Good way to piss away alot of tax payer $$$ WTF , bunch of HOMOSEXUALLY ABOUNDS LIBERAL Democrats BITCHES ¡!

tracy thomas said...

We know from Exhibit 1 that not one of the streets, sidewalks or bridges on the wish list is binding--mandated to be built. Can someone please check what the fine print says about Bond Issue 3? Can the City once again do cost-shifting, eg stealing--any of that money away from the pets to cover the city's $6 billion backlog of real maintenance projects?

Anonymous said...

Good point, Tracy--as usual. And I doubt that the public has any idea that the bond issue won't pay a dime for the light bill--just build two thirds of a shell of a shelter and expect the public to "pony" up for the rest. So how will the Council justify covering another $6 million a year in shelter operations costs out of the general fund--when they're already subsidizing Cordish and the Power and Light disaster $15 million this year???

Anonymous said...

Following KCMO and their misguided priorities is like watching drunks and gambling addicts--just frittering their money away for instant gratification or paying off a drug dealer.

TruDat said...

Did anyone watch Glorioso on Ruckus this week? He was very subdued. Like the KU team now that they just lost to the Oregon Ducks. And Glorioso is the only guy in town doing any polling. It must be dreadful. Each issue requires a very unusual 57.1% to pass. Almost impossible to do. I predict 1,2 and 3 will all fail.

12 Step Survivor said...

KCMO is being led by a bunch of losers. If this were your household budget, would you be grinding out your daily responsibilities--or would you be out running up your credit card for anything on these wish lists? My Dad was a drunk who promised us all kinds of things that never happened. And when he thought he really needed cash, he'd break into our piggy banks. That's how Sly James and the City operate. Rob Peter to pay Paul. Zoo money ended up paying off downtown TIF bonds. Do the dog lovers actually believe that even if they get us to vote for #3, the City won't quickly slide some of that over to something they call a "pet project" rather than a pet shelter?? Zero credibility.

Just.Say.No. said...

This plan is running off the rails--just like our Toy Train in a big rainstorm.

KC Voter said...

What a waste of money. We need a better dog shelter plan, let's go back to the drawing board.

Anonymous said...

Sly done lied so much that the stuff rubbed off on the dog people. His vile betrayals smell like doo doo.

Nusrat Borsha said...

wow! You really write wonderfully. Your information will be very inspiring and motivational for many. The benefits of crowdfunding can't be described in words,actually.

Anonymous said...

Exactly. Indrastructure projects should be "paygo" not huge one time bond issues. Set up a property tax fund if you want and use only the revenue you take in for projects that year. This whole GOBOND issue is a mess and deserves to be voted down.