Can we trust Nutter? No.
Steve Kraske asks the right question in an opinion piece on Sunday's Star: "Is Jim Nutter Sr. trying to kill light rail in Kansas City?" Never trust anyone's answer that is qualified with "per se". If past history (here and here) helps predict future actions, then the answer is probably yes, he is trying to kill light rail via bait and switch. Nutter (and James Kemper) personally financed the anti-light-rail group that opposed the city-backed 2001 plan. We're not really sure why the Star's staff has forgotten these facts that are readily available in their archives.
After some thought, it appears obvious that they will use the time between now and a February 2008 vote to build a war chest to scare Kansas Citians with their anti-tax and eminent domain untruths. They'll most likely pay to have anti-transit nut case Wendell Cox come and tell you — and the Star – how it would be cheaper to buy every KC transit rider a new car (perhaps an ultra-thrifty Prius) than to build light rail. What such economically-narrow arguments always avoid are the environmental and human benefits of providing mass transit… just ask anyone who lives in St. Louis. In short, we have uncovered a true wolf in sheep's clothing.
8 Comments so far
Leave a reply
Not to be cliche - but I think you hit the nail on the head here - pretty dead on. I was rather disgusted to learn this week about this action that has been taken. I have to admit I am no fan of the details of the Chastain plan, but I want light rail. And for the mayor to back this idea and disregard the wishes of the voters who voting in the same election that brought him to office - well let’s just say I am beginning to think that this is one vote I wish I could have back.
The City needs to respect the general wishes of the electorate and put forth an alternate plan that lays out how our city can join the rest of the great cities of America and the World and have a public mass transit system. Unless another plan is on the table - my vote on the nutty Nutter plan is NO!
Someone needs to remind Kraske. Shoot him an email.
When we build light rail, it needs to serve the needs of the city, not just the voters.
I was one of the voters who voted against the Chastain plan. I want a light rail plan that we can afford to build, afford to run, afford to extend to all of the metro area so that it becomes a truly comprehensive transportation system. Chastain’s plan does not fill those needs and may, in fact, block our chances of getting the right light rail system. I suppose something is better than nothing, but darn it, let’s dream big and get something that really works.
I would be willing to wait another year or five if it meant the rail we build would be more workable and lead to something better in the future.
I believe that having a good transportation system is a prerequisite to being a great city, but are a great many other things. Building a light rail system, however cool, won’t vault Kansas City into the Great City Club until we do some serious work on infrastructure, education, economic inequality……..
my reference to metrolink in this discussion was only to remind people that our neighbors on the other side of the state have fought a similar battle against anti-transit wingnuts, not that our system will be mechanically or systematically identical.
this has everything to do with nutter. they’re downplaying the connection because they want it to appear grassroots and float under the radar until their PR onslaught can begin. rest assured that their effort will be well-funded and nasty, even though nutter himself was mayor funkhouser’s strongest supporters.
Isn’t Nutter senior like 80+ yrs. old too? Somebody had a post on this (Mark?), but why is it that raisins, in the last years of their life, can have so much impact on our futures.
in a way, doinkman, it is ironic that someone so “powerful” utilized the same petition initiative process available to all citizens instead of working a deal on the inside. regardless, his is possibly the last generation (there might be one more, we’ll see) that insists KC operates their way.
it’s important that when the council decides to put this initiative on the february ballot that people vote NO, even if that same ballot includes a city-backed question that details the replacement for the chastain plan. hopefully the city-backed question will be “replace the details” and not “repeal, then re-vote” in two steps. either way, the vote is still at risk from the anti-tax and anti-transit forces.
When to the meeting tonight. If Light Rail will cost to much to build how come no other plans were discussed at the meeeting? Don’t think some of the people on the task force know about some of the cost like they should.
The task force need to get facts from other built Light Rail and Streetcar towns to get up to date dollars. Do a master plan for the city with bus and LR or streecar and compare them.
About buying cars for the poor.Molly D Castelaz with the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis wrote about cars for the poor. She is a senior economist. go to www.stlouisfed.org/publications/re/2004/c/pages/light_rail.html. Hybrid cars would be replaced every 5 years only for the poor. I am not against transit just the poor use for light rail when we have better ways. Better use of small buses and streetcars could do that.