Here's a description of the crowd at a recent Kansas City Townhall meeting concerning light rail:
ONLY 13 PEOPLE SHOWED UP TO A RECENT TOWN HALL CONCERNING LIGHT RAIL!!!
The most conspicuous participants:
2 City Council People
2 ATA people
2 LR opponents
1 (at least) on the pro light rail committee
1 Of my favorite bloggers who I just happen to disagree with about Light Rail.
And 2 more anti-light rail folks to ask planted questions ("whats in it for us?")
And 1 dude who asked us not to distribute flyers in the room
IMPORTANT FACT FROM AN AWESOME TKC TIPSTER: THERE WASN'T EVEN A HANDFUL OF WESTSIDERS IN THE ROOM!!!
That's kind of important considering that all of my neighbors, even the white ones, think that light rail is a joke and they're going to vote against it.
Strangely, Mayor Funky didn't show but he's hanging out at home most of the time anyway and there wasn't a stupid gimmick involved so naturally simply answering questions didn't merit his attention.
Sham meeting. Rigged light rail taskforce. Hispanics know what is happening. Promisses time. No delivery expected.
ReplyDeleteWhat a joke. The same thing happened at the meeting I attended.
ReplyDeleteAnother City paid for dog and pony show. I guess Mexicans really are smart, they remember the lies from the past and just spend their time doing something of value. Of course they could have gotten the chance to see how smart "mensaman bullyboy" really is.
ReplyDeleteAnd that good looking Janice the poster girl for the Junior League Ice Show. I enjoyed the affair. Are there any more of these informational meetings?
Sham meeting shows contempt for Westsiders and Democracy.
ReplyDeleteI was at the Westside so called town meeting conducted by the Light Rail campaign. It was like watching a theater troop in that all the audience was part of the act, except for the two opponents who monitored the meeting. It was something to behold--- the troop gathered in the room and then at opening the performance began.
Mayor Funkhouser failed to attend this meeting in the Hispanic community. But then the public didn't show up either.
Tony's report on attendance agrees with my notes. There were 13 people (let's call them actors) in the room. There were two city councilpersons present. The General Manager of the KCATA. There was the KCATA board president who lives in Kansas. There were three functionaries of the Light Rail Campaign and just four from the community. And the two opponents monitoring the meeting.
But here is the point: it is one week before the election. No public hearing was held for the Westside area during the Citizen's Light Rail Taskforce meetings in the Fall of 2007 when the plan was being prepared for the city council. Meetings had been held that Fall north of the river at least twice and in the core of town several times. The recommendations of the taskforce were submitted to the city council in late Novemeber of 2007. Hispanic community had little opportunity for input.
Why no public meeting in the westside during the planning process? Answer: the City Council didn't want to deal with the Hispanic community since the rail line was not going anywhere near the westside. But now the city council and the KCATA need all the votes they can get. Thus, a rigged or sham campaign meeting for the Hispanic community. This is 11 months after the council had received the taskforce report.
Westsiders should not feel alone, howerver. The KCATA and HNTB engineers did not go into south Kansas City until May 15th. And then they did so without any real publicity or notification. And what was the turnout at that meeting? Fourteen people were there. Of that 14, only six were from the general public. The rest were HNTB engineers and planners, paid consultants, two reporters, the owner of the local paper and couple of citizens from outside the city limits. Councilman John Sharp who is a supporter of light rail criticized KCATA and HNTB for not informing the public of the meeting.
Monday evening's meeting in the Westside was a staged theatrical play, not a community meeting.
This is a 25 year tax increase that has no direct transportation benefit for either the westside or the southside.
"It was like watching a theater troop in that all the audience was part of the act"
ReplyDeleteI was there too and I can assure you I was not part of any "act". I found out about the meeting and decided to attend without any encouragement. I too was disappointed in the turnout but to hurl anonymous accusations about it being "staged" is in my opinion irresponsible.
To my knowledge nobody was paid to be there. If all the anti-transit forces can do is stalk the blogs with personal attacks then I'm feeling more positive than ever that a Yes vote on Tuesday is the right decision for me.
And by the way, Anon 11:19AM since you claim you were there, why weren't you willing to insult Russ Johnson and Jan Marcason to their faces last night? I don't recall anybody throwing around Mensa or Junior League comments in person.
Mark Forsythe
My personal opinions about people do not have any place in a public meeting which has been called to provide information on a ballot proposal. I have been very candid with Janice and Russ in public that were not public meetings.
ReplyDeleteI see a blog as a part of the "commons" which is what Pershing Square, Trafalgar Square or other locations for persons who like to argue actually historically are.
Did you catch the information on overlay zones and economic development-- do you also support this type of subterfuge or just the train?
Sounds like a Joe Miller staged media op. Was the steer there? Hard to debate a steer.
ReplyDeleteKeep it all in perspective, folks.
ReplyDeleteSimply vote NO! next Tuesday and all this light rail madness will drift away...never to be heard from again.
Well Mark where is your answer as one of the people who herd MR. JOHNSON speak about the stations, overlay zones and the economic development. Are you for the use of a lite rail plan to hide the taking of prime property around the stations for developers to "keep the city moving forward"?
ReplyDeleteHow about the statements about the million dollar plus investment on Main Street which "should never have been allowed" This is City Councilpersons talking about a person who did everything according to planning and zoning. He followed the rules and invested his money and the City Councilpersons say it shouldn't have been allowed. So much for the rule of law, so much for the representatives of the people believing in equality under the law. That statement smacks of an attitude that "you get what we want to give you" It is sorta of like the bullyboy on my playground who decided everyday who got to play basketball. Surly you do not encourage that type of City Council envolvement.