Monday, October 09, 2017


The debate over the new airport is now in full gear with very little face-to-face conversation but only Internets argument. Here's the latest volley as we slouch toward the November vote . . .

The Campaign Fight Over The New Kansas City Single-Terminal Starts NOW

Well the KC Star started off the hard sell with an editorial on Sunday morning which is flawed with FAKE NEWS. They appear to have jumped 100% on the City Hall bandwagon. You need to be ready; this week some of you will receive a mailer from the “A BETTER KCI” or as we call them the STP’s (Single Terminal Supporters). They quote a couple reports about economic development, money needed to update terminals, etc. CFRG reminds them an extensive remodel, as several companies have presented, will accomplish all the same objectives a destroy terminals and start over plan will accomplish and at a lower cost. All they need to do is look at Dallas and their extensive remodel. In addition all the union jobs will be there with the remodel. The union guys can save their campaign money and support the remodel vote early next year. We don’t have to destroy solid concrete terminals and replace them with a tin hangar with windows and a waterfall to get this accomplished.

STP’s mailer says a new single terminal will bring more direct flights and more flight options (this is the same fake garbage the Star regurgitated this morning). STP's obviously missed the ATAG meeting where the Southwest Executive told us all; “two things bring more flights to an airport…one is gates and two is passengers”.

 KCI currently has the gates BUT our airport gurus want to cut the number of gates almost in half. How will that bring more flights? If Kansas City adds population thru jobs, better schools, safer streets, etc. and maintains it’s gate count, the flights will come. Flights won't come if you don’t have the gates and the people to fill the airplanes.

STP’s also stated the terminal won’t cost taxpayers any of their tax money (just like it is now). However there will be a liability on the books of the Aviation Department for the cost of the new single terminal ($1.5 Billion - $2 Billion). The City taxpayers, you, own the aviation department. If the airlines default YOU are on the hook to the bondholders! The STP’s say “Oh that can’t happen”. CFRG says remember TWA, Braniff, Midwest Express, Eastern, PSA, Continental, Mohawk and Pan Am all left others holding the bag.

VOTE NO-vember 7th, Question #1
Tell them you are waiting for the remodel ordinance to vote yes!


Anonymous said...

You're "preaching to the Choir" here, the vast majority of potential KC voters don't want this damn thing to happen! But, unless we can come up with some way to get people to actually go to the polls ad vote "HELL NO" in overwhelming numbers, this will be announced as having passed!

Don't forget that there is no independent body counting the votes, and those who will count them are part of the corrupt mess that created this whole nightmare in the first place.

I'm very much afraid that, unless the numbers are something on the order of 85% NO - 15% YES, they won't be scared enough to fiddle with the results(Oh, they MEANT to vote yes...) or else pull a "Koster" and just arbitrarily throw out a bunch of ballots.

Please talk to people and do everything you can to convince them to take the time to go t he polls and vote against ths Abominaion!

Anonymous said...

The Star's still riding the lame horse idea that a new terminal will mean more direct and maybe even international flights without the slightest effort at trying to explain how a building creates those demands for the airlines to fill.
The number of flights, destinations, and size of the airplanes used depends on being able to put butts in as many seats as possible, not whether or not there's a nifty new gourmet restaurant near the departure gate.
If this "more flights" idea is the best the boosters can come up with, the case for this is even thinner than originally thought.

Anonymous said...

vote no!

it not only will save the convenience and lower costs of KCI but it sill also teach the corrupt elites that people want common sense and efficiency in government.


Anonymous said...



Anonymous said...

How do you contact the group opposing this gigantic corrupt money grab from tax payers.

Is it possible to get the group name and a contact person?

Anonymous said...

Citizens for Responsible Government (CFRG) wrote this missive and are against the single terminal project because their members want to see a remodeled KCI. There are plans drawn up showing a classic, mid-century, modern airport using the basic concrete ctructures we have. You can contact CFRG at You can also check them out on Facebook!

Anonymous said...

based on this rendering of the proposed hairport...George Jetson and his family, wife Jane, daughter Judy and son Elroy would like it....

Anonymous said...

it's more art than design and that's the intention.

an airport with few people? of course that looks pretty.

Anonymous said...

If a new terminal brings more nonstop destinations, then why isn’t Topeka building a $1B airport?

Anonymous said...

kansas was supposed to be a hub and build an airport with a lot of gates. it didn't happen.

the few airlines left now are definitely following flyer demand.

KCI's demand wil be what it will be, regardless of the terminal configuration.

fir the next few years, remodeling terminal b with common sense changes is the best solution.

if amazon moves here, ok, all bets are off.

Anonymous said...

VOTE NO to a pack of lies about needing a single terminal airport. The airlines have said NOTHING about paying for it, and the KC STAR and KC Business Journal are blatantly making up stories about it. Please get out and VOTE NO NO NO.

Anonymous said...

Kevin Collison said that he heard it was "KOOL"