<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Biz Journal Poll: KC says &#8216;Move On!&#8217;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kclightrail.com/2007/06/12/biz-journal-poll-kc-says-move-on/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kclightrail.com/2007/06/12/biz-journal-poll-kc-says-move-on/</link>
	<description>Your source for news and information on Kansas City's light rail progress</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2010 19:14:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: idfqpejtnu</title>
		<link>http://kclightrail.com/2007/06/12/biz-journal-poll-kc-says-move-on/comment-page-1/#comment-653</link>
		<dc:creator>idfqpejtnu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Jun 2007 22:44:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kclightrail.com/2007/06/12/biz-journal-poll-kc-says-move-on/#comment-653</guid>
		<description>Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! zyyrmklefh</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! zyyrmklefh</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: northlander</title>
		<link>http://kclightrail.com/2007/06/12/biz-journal-poll-kc-says-move-on/comment-page-1/#comment-573</link>
		<dc:creator>northlander</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Jun 2007 19:28:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kclightrail.com/2007/06/12/biz-journal-poll-kc-says-move-on/#comment-573</guid>
		<description>To mainstream: So what&#039;s the urgency with less than 1% of the population riding transit and over a 100 million dollars being used each year.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To mainstream: So what&#8217;s the urgency with less than 1% of the population riding transit and over a 100 million dollars being used each year.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: northlander</title>
		<link>http://kclightrail.com/2007/06/12/biz-journal-poll-kc-says-move-on/comment-page-1/#comment-540</link>
		<dc:creator>northlander</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jun 2007 21:39:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kclightrail.com/2007/06/12/biz-journal-poll-kc-says-move-on/#comment-540</guid>
		<description>Light Rail cost will be to high and should put KC in more red ink. With $20 million needed to operate it per year it&#039;s more taxes and less services for the people. Streetcars might work because of lower cost per mile.Will need some downtown support to pay for streecars {$1 million each],all the law firms could buy a car for a tax write off, and the banks could chip in and pay for transit stops,parks&amp;rec could help with some streetscape, and thet would keep the cost down to get more miles built.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Light Rail cost will be to high and should put KC in more red ink. With $20 million needed to operate it per year it&#8217;s more taxes and less services for the people. Streetcars might work because of lower cost per mile.Will need some downtown support to pay for streecars {$1 million each],all the law firms could buy a car for a tax write off, and the banks could chip in and pay for transit stops,parks&amp;rec could help with some streetscape, and thet would keep the cost down to get more miles built.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob</title>
		<link>http://kclightrail.com/2007/06/12/biz-journal-poll-kc-says-move-on/comment-page-1/#comment-510</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jun 2007 17:32:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kclightrail.com/2007/06/12/biz-journal-poll-kc-says-move-on/#comment-510</guid>
		<description>I think it&#039;s clear that most people who voted for the plan didn&#039;t actually want it to succeed as designed, but wanted the initiative to be brought to the foreground.  KC lacks good regional and local public transit, and this is proof that people know it.  The ironic side is that the riders are waiting for the system to make improvements, and the system is waiting for the riders before it makes improvements.  

As far as regional/local action is concerned: KCMO has the most to gain or lose.  The surrounding communities don&#039;t have the need for the system as KCMO does (as a whole city/voting community).  If we wait for the rest of the metro, it will be another 10+ years of a stalemate.  

The plan needs to develop from the center out.  Having connections to the rest of the area would be great, and extremely beneficial, but a connection to Olathe or the  airport doesn&#039;t need to precede a functional and affordable system in the center.  Once the core is a functioning reality, the rest of the metro would more easily come on board and all would benefit.

Basically, light rail is just the formal declaration of  local citizens&#039; desire for an efficient mass transit system. In most cities, that relies on a reliable back bone such as light rail could provide.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it&#8217;s clear that most people who voted for the plan didn&#8217;t actually want it to succeed as designed, but wanted the initiative to be brought to the foreground.  KC lacks good regional and local public transit, and this is proof that people know it.  The ironic side is that the riders are waiting for the system to make improvements, and the system is waiting for the riders before it makes improvements.  </p>
<p>As far as regional/local action is concerned: KCMO has the most to gain or lose.  The surrounding communities don&#8217;t have the need for the system as KCMO does (as a whole city/voting community).  If we wait for the rest of the metro, it will be another 10+ years of a stalemate.  </p>
<p>The plan needs to develop from the center out.  Having connections to the rest of the area would be great, and extremely beneficial, but a connection to Olathe or the  airport doesn&#8217;t need to precede a functional and affordable system in the center.  Once the core is a functioning reality, the rest of the metro would more easily come on board and all would benefit.</p>
<p>Basically, light rail is just the formal declaration of  local citizens&#8217; desire for an efficient mass transit system. In most cities, that relies on a reliable back bone such as light rail could provide.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mainstream</title>
		<link>http://kclightrail.com/2007/06/12/biz-journal-poll-kc-says-move-on/comment-page-1/#comment-507</link>
		<dc:creator>mainstream</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jun 2007 16:02:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kclightrail.com/2007/06/12/biz-journal-poll-kc-says-move-on/#comment-507</guid>
		<description>I think you&#039;re doing a good job on here, as is Mark Forsythe on his blog. 

We need to gain more popular backing that promotes a sense of urgency. It&#039;s my impression that KC economic development leadership organization is not centralized and is fairly fractured. So by default we&#039;re kind of on hold until the city council transportation committee starts providing some leadership. I don&#039;t perceieve a sense of urgency or leadership on this issue from Ed Ford.

Ed Ford&#039;s great, but I think on this issue he would like to stand up and wisk the tarp off the train in front of a crowd, without doing a lot of behind-the-scenes, roll up your sleeves work.

We need to do something different, instead of letting random forces and chaos theory rule.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you&#8217;re doing a good job on here, as is Mark Forsythe on his blog. </p>
<p>We need to gain more popular backing that promotes a sense of urgency. It&#8217;s my impression that KC economic development leadership organization is not centralized and is fairly fractured. So by default we&#8217;re kind of on hold until the city council transportation committee starts providing some leadership. I don&#8217;t perceieve a sense of urgency or leadership on this issue from Ed Ford.</p>
<p>Ed Ford&#8217;s great, but I think on this issue he would like to stand up and wisk the tarp off the train in front of a crowd, without doing a lot of behind-the-scenes, roll up your sleeves work.</p>
<p>We need to do something different, instead of letting random forces and chaos theory rule.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paintfumes</title>
		<link>http://kclightrail.com/2007/06/12/biz-journal-poll-kc-says-move-on/comment-page-1/#comment-496</link>
		<dc:creator>Paintfumes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2007 22:03:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kclightrail.com/2007/06/12/biz-journal-poll-kc-says-move-on/#comment-496</guid>
		<description>It won&#039;t matter. If the Mayor doesn&#039;t back it. It won&#039;t happen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It won&#8217;t matter. If the Mayor doesn&#8217;t back it. It won&#8217;t happen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
