You sure?

Maybe a conversation with an employment discrimination attorney may change your mind. The actual words use are often times overlooked in comparison with overt insenuations or intended messages. People are constructively discharged every day due to unspoken, non-literal influences and pressures of their employers.

Word to the wise landlord. Don't "advise" a tenant to vote one way or another. IMO, it's walking a dangerous path.

Employment discrimination is quite different than voter intimidation or using the excercise of free speech. I might be a little bit rusty but one example in a employment discrimination class I vaguely remember was a man could go up to a woman in a bar and say she looks sexy and does she want a good time. But if a supervisor went up to a female employee and said the same thing watch out. There was even one female attorney who told the group you shouldn't even say a co-worker looked good (not sexy just good) in a new outfit.
At least in times of old, don't know about now, when the city had a bond or tax issue on the ballot it cannot distribute literature to tell the resident to vote YES. But it can send out literature describing the benefits if the issue passed or 'discreetly' imply the consequences if it did not pass.



I have to admit it wasn't good but it was all I could think of at the time. Even though tornado watch and tornado warning have different meanings for my wife it means the same - go to the basement.

Yes, employment discrimination must involve employment.

If the weather service employs a tornado to coerce a good time, I vote yes. All wives should be kept in the basement.

Now, where's that damn streetcar?

You're missing the element of implicit punishment that exists in the landlord scenario and not in any of your other analogies (sort of exists in the employment discrimination analogy that KC-wildcat introduced due to the power relationship involved). If the city is voting on a tax then it's to pay for something, and if it doesn't pass that something can't be funded. There's no implied threat here, it's just facts. The landlord probably attempts to frame his rent thing the same way, that if his costs go up that money has to come from somewhere, but a landlord's relationship with his tenants is fundamentally different from a city's relationship with its citizens or a political party's relationship with voters. There's a very fine line between the simple cause and effect of "higher taxes mean higher costs" and the threat of "if you vote for something I don't want you to vote for, I'm going to make you pay." No matter what his intentions are, it doesn't feel above board. I'm sure this exact thing has come up before and I don't know how courts have ruled on it in the past but it seems like a dangerous game for the landlord to play.

Another reason in a long list of reason as to why KC needs better public transit:

Younger people are driving less and using public transit more.







http://dc.streetsblog.org/2012/04/05/u- ... kes-buses/

Dave,

I have been hearing many recent conversations beginning with "If we don't get the Tiger Grant..."

Do you assess this as nervousness, or some indication of what is being anticipated (based on eveidence, rather than a feeling)?

Tell me something good.....

I know they met with the Detroit streetcar people Monday and told them to get a couple more ducks in a row...

it's the anticipation. no one knows, otherwise it would have found its way to twitter (i have an automated alert). cleaver will be the first to hear if we win, and predictably, he will leak it. if we don't win, leaks will come elsewhere and we might be able to assume we didn't win.

the detroit thing was pretty surreal, coupled with the fact that it played out live in front of the media. that could mean that detroit is out of the running this round or that no winners will be announced for another 60 days. again, no one knows.

.

Eastside auxilary route?

http://www.tonyskansascity.com/2012/06/ ... ws_11.html

Yes, it's about economic development through the movement of people.

He has been against rail in KC since I first read his articles years ago.

I remember an article he wrote where he stated that KC ought to cater to the suburbs by making it easier to drive Downtown i.e. more parking. I am not sure he understands that urban areas were not orginally designed to be car centric. I know that he will say that he understands, but he really doesn't IMHO.

no one with a say on this project is listening to jack cashill or tony. hasn't come up once in any discussion i've had.

there will be a streetcar plan, at some point, that will detail preferred corridors for expansion beyond the "south to plaza/umkc" that's already in the works. it's inevitable that one of them will go east since that's where a large portion of KCMO sits. the city doesn't have to wait for federal dollars to do anything, especially with these less expensive streetcars. cities were a decade ahead of the feds on this trend, and it will continue regardless of whether "obamacash" continues to rain beyond january.

in fact, just last week some at city hall indicated that the second TDD election should be held regardless of the TIGER outcome because it's entirely possible the project could be built for the $73 million the TDD will generate. the $101 million figure is a very high level estimate based on very little engineering work (work that will complete later this summer). under this scenario, the city could apply for additional TIGER grants to simply close the TDD sooner rather than later.

Won't the district stay in place to provide funds to cover shortfall in operating costs?

only if no other source is found for continued operations.