Soccer proposal

The Johnson County Park and Recreation District has a $7 million facility and acreage sitting idle on U.S. 56 in Edgerton. Numerous other properties owned by Johnson County in Shawnee and Olathe could be utilized to build many soccer fields for our youth.

Why do we, the taxpayers, need to spend $120,000 an acre for unimproved land on U.S. 69 and 167th Street? This is basically a “gift” to the Kansas City Wizards and not the children of Johnson County.

The park district should properly use the 2,500-plus acres already owned for this venture.

Please vote no on this proposal.

Ray Smith
Olathe

Wonder why Overland Park is doing all it can pushing such a high-priced “land for the youth” soccer proposal, and asking county taxpayers outside of its city limits to pay for it?

Johnson County taxpayers who are not residents of Overland Park would pay the ridiculously high price of real estate for soccer fields that should be built elsewhere. It is Overland Park that will benefit from the future Wizards stadium and nearby retail megaville.

The stadium will be run by Overland Park, not the county. And of course the retail (if the tax breaks ever end) will benefit Overland Park, not any other city in the county. Great strategy for Overland Park, a fiscal loss for other cities.

Jim Case
Overland Park

Comments

[Jason Peck - KS house 24th district candidate (L)]

That we can agree on Robert (that neither of us will change the other's mind).

I really don't see how a Soccer park in Southern JoCo is going to benefit me in Northeast JoCo. I do see it costing me, and I do see my property taxes are already oppressive. Assuming the STAR bonds pass for the Wizards' corporate welfare, most of the tax revenue generated in the area will go to pay the bonds back, not into the general fund.

So that really brings it down to jobs, most of which will probably be low paying and as such will have a hard time finding anyone in that area to work at them. Unless someone can make the case that a van load of soccer kids is going to stop by my neighborhood or my garage sale and buy some stuff on the way to the park, I'm not seeing the benefit to the rest of us.

If you have kids that want to play soccer, that's great. Let's find a place that doesn't cost $57k per acre and isn't being pushed by the Wizards and Price Brothers Realty, and build a park there. OH, and btw, next time, don't use the "it's for the children" campaign. I think it's getting to the point that alot of us automatically are against anything that's "for the children" (notice the quotes), because it almost never really is.

[Rovert]

Jason, final comment to you:

Since much of the proposed $24 Million would come from tournaments (local, regional & National) I would suspect that it would be incremental.

The reason I say that this is my final comment is that we both have our opinion and and are in no way going to change the other person's mind.

In closing, let me just say that I would vote for this project no matter where in JOCO is was planned. I see this as an opportunity for growth and a good thing for the community. I tend to look at the community as a whole, unlike several of the vocal people in Northern JOCO who only think in their neighborhood.

VOTE YES on Question 1.

[Kansasdog]

"It would be rather difficult for anyone to determine how much "due diligence" has been done when most of the process was most likely done prior to this." I want more information about why this location was chosen. It only seems fair for a project that will cost JOCO and OP $100 million (including needed infrastructure costs).

"And if you have read statements from Price Brothers, you would have seen that they stated it would be better for them from a financial standpoint to develop the site residential." well shucks, aren't these guys nice. Trouble is, that land wouldn't be developed for residential for several years. Money now is better than more money later.

I've asked before and no one seems to know (much like most of this proposal) is the $24 million incremental, or are we simply moving money from one area of JOCO to another?

[Rovert]

Kansasdog:

Where does it say that the process has only been "in the works" for only four months? The quote you posted states "The ownership group approached Overland Park in late July 2006 to start negotiations for its part of the larger project." THat indicates that this is when the Wizards organization may have begun working on its part of the "larger project", it says nothing about when the search for appropriate sites for the youth complex began. It would be rather difficult for anyone to determine how much "due diligence" has been done when most of the process was most likely done prior to this. And if you have read statements from Price Brothers, you would have seen that they stated it would be better for them from a financial standpoint to develop the site residential.

You also state: "I agree that the kids need soccer fields, but this is not the way to accomplish it." How is this not the way to do it? It would build 24 new fields, with I believe 18 field turf, all will be built to maximum FIFA size requirements which will allow the configuration of the fields to be modified to allow multiple small-sided games to be played on one field, it will allow practice and games to be held regardless of weather conditions, it will reduce the load on the existing fields which would allow more opportunity for upgrades and repairs to be done.

I don't see how that alone is not a positive. Then add in the expected financial influx from tournaments at around $24 million per year.

[Kansasdog]

Rovert,

from the Star article you reference...
Q: Who picked the site?

A: According to Overland Park’s Web site, the location was chosen by the new owners of the Wizards after a search of potential locations in Johnson County. The ownership group approached Overland Park in late July 2006 to start negotiations for its part of the larger project.

So, given that this has been in the works for only FOUR MONTHS, how much due diligence has been give to examining the site vs. pressure from the developer who bought the property LAST YEAR and will get all of their incvestment back by selling HALF the property?

I agree that the kids need soccer fields, but this is not the way to accomplish it.

[Jason Peck - KS house 24th district candidate (L)]

Robert:

I misread your figure; I read it as per year, not per month, sorry for that. No need to get personal here.

You already said this was an opportunity for the whole county. Re-stating that doesn't make it any more valid. I asked you what reason it benefits the rest of the county economically, and you didn't answer.

As for the business benefit, let me ask this: What effect do you think our oppresive tax rate has on business and individuals thinking of moving here? Do you really think our lack of economic progress in this area is because of the lack of a soccer field, or could it be more likely high taxes?

If you think $18.48 per year is no big deal for something that doesn't directly affect you, please donate to my campaign. I would gladly accecpt $18.48 from you, since it's really no big deal. There's a paypal button on my website,
http://candidate.lpks.org/jasonpeck

I mean really, what's $1.50 a month? It's even less if you average it out over 2 years, since I won't run again for elected office until then. Just pennies a day... you can't afford NOT to donate to me the way I see it.

[Rovert]

Jason,

I can only assume that math is not your strong point since the "figures" I presented is 1.50 per month which calculates to $18 per year. As for the other things, what other things are you speaking of? This is for the entire soccer complex package including all of the items I mentioned in my first response to you.

As for "Why do I as a JoCo resident in Shawnee, Olathe, Gardner, etc, really care about this?" Step outside of your bubble, there is a whole county around you. This is an opportunity for the entire county, not one small section. Try to think of the county as a whole, not segregated little zones.

To save you the leg work, here is a link to a story in today's Star:
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/local/15916260.htm

and here is a link to a 5 minute video that answers a lot of questions:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7717600217174825444

[Jason Peck - KS house 24th district candidate (L)]

Robert:

You might check your figures. According to JoCo Parks and Rec, the tax increase is $18.48 for the median JoCo homeowner, and that's just for the bond issue, not the other things mentioned.

As for your assertion that it will benefit everyone, my question is how? Why do I as a JoCo resident in Shawnee, Olathe, Gardner, etc, really care about this? The tax generated from the new businesses will presumably go to pay back the STAR bonds. The profit made by those companies goes into their pockets, not mine. About the only thing you might say is it creates more jobs, which is good, because with our tax rate we're all going to need another one soon.

[Rovert]

Jason Pek:
How much will this REALLY cost us: 75 million over 20 years. That's about $1.50 a month for the median house in JOCO.

and how much will we REALLY benefit? It is estimated to be around $24 Million per year.

Rhis is for the entire county, the fields, the park, the streamway, the trails, the shelters, the rec center....these will be available to ALL residents of JOCO, not just those located in Southern JOCO. And, the entire county will benefit from the increased spending brought on by hosting tournaments at the complex. The infux of money spent indirectly befefits the entire county.

[Jason Peck - KS house 24th district candidate (L)]

According to the Tax Foundation (www.taxfoundation.org), Kansas has gone from being ranked the 24th highest in property tax to the 14th highest from 2002 to 2004. Our Gasoline tax is one of the highest in the nation. Our sales tax is above the median. Our average tax burden all combined puts us at 18th in the nation. Now, as if property taxes aren't high enough, we're asked to support at $75m bond issue for a soccer park in the Southern part of the county?

This does NOT benefit the entire county. We will NOT share in the profits made by the Wizards (unless we're one of the businesses that set up after the STAR bonds are issued for Wizards' corporate welfare), but WE are being asked to pay for it.

Not only are we asked to pay for the bond issue (with interest of course, over 20 years), but there will have to be major upgrades of infrastructure, including but not limited to police, fire, trash, road maintenance, etc.

How much will this REALLY cost us, and how much will we REALLY benefit? The answer, INMO, is ALOT and NOT MUCH.

Too bad Price Brothers didn't spend a $500,000.00 on investigating better sites for this park instead of trying to get us to buy its land, because it might turn out to have saved us alot of money.

If you haven't already done so, please proceed to the nearest polling place and VOTE NO for Soccer Welfare. IT's for the taxpayers.

[Rovert]

Patches, a couple of things:

1. Could you explain how it is "overpriced"? A parcel of land 2 miles south of this location just sold for more per acre than this site is costing, so the cost is in line with the area. And when you consider the expect annual financial influx to JOCO from this site is identified at around $24 million, it seems like a bargain.

2. You stated "Other cities have built similar for much less." Could you identify a couple of these cities and their complexes? I have not located any similar to what is being proposed here.

3. Alternative sites were reviewed, I believe there were 7 sites, including the Olathe site. The South O.P. site was picked because of several criteria.

[kcstar_is_one_sided]

If you have any kids who have played compentative sports you know that premium locations with premium fields get the best tournaments and the most interest from teams that travel. This location is the perfect location because of this.

Has anyone on this board ever been to Peoria,AZ. The have some of the best baseball facitlies around and the number of hotels and businesses that have been built to support the tourists and sports teams that go to play tournaments there is astounding.

OP, KS is a great location for soccer and the weather suits the sport well. KC,KS has done a great job by building the race track, which I personally have not interest in, but now the popularity of that venture has led to the t-bones and the great wolf lodge, all those great stores, and soon Schlitterbaun (sp?)

OP should pony up and prvide another reason for people to wnat spend money in our community. The soccer park is a great idea.

[Engineer]

Kansasdog
You are wrong about the support, my wife and I voted "yes" on the question this afternoon. You can get farther northeast in the County than we are, but not much. I'm not a soccer fan but it seems to be a very good sport for youngsters. If the question passes, at least we will have something positive under way.

[patches]

Meant to say, "NOT" been studied.

[patches]

I live in JOCO and am planning to vote no because I think its being rushed and alternative sites and costs have been studied. I am not against the soccer fields in general, just in the way its being done. The cost per resident isn't much, but I think its way overpriced. Other cities have built similar for much less. Just because we have the money doesn't mean we should just automatically approve it.

[Joe]

My bookie just called ... price is down to 75 cents. Gonna have a Mountain Dew instead.

out.

[mike d]

Kansas already has the T-Bones, we dont need another minor league team. I might have enough change in the jar I keep on my dresser to buy the Royals, so I will think about it though.... (20 seconds passes) Ive thought about it - not worth it.

[Joe]

Jackson County is footing the bill Mike.

The peanuts "you all" pay in concessions, parking and tickets - are menial.

... and you can have the Royals. I imagine you could probably buy them for a buck - no credit cards or checks.

[mike d]

Good plan Joe. The only thing is - After the Chiefs move to the Kansas side of the wall because nobody shows up for the games anymore, why the hell would we have to go to Missouri? The friendly people?

[Joe]

Yeah, yeah, yeah - whine about it ... that will make things better.

I say put up a big honkin fence - like the Berlin wall. Toll access TO Missouri is acceptable - however be prepared to pay big $$ to get in - no credit cards or checks accepted.

JC just needs to get over itself.

[mike d]

Yes len, you folks in MO do want things built, you just want the folks out here in Kansas to help you pay for it. Notice that this election is for JO CO only, not Jackson county too. Feel free to come out and enjoy the facility anytime you like without any animosity.

[Kansasdog]

... but I thought that "it's for the children"

[Brian]

...but are you really surprised by that? In any election race you will see big contributions by those who have something to gain by their issue being passed.

That's like saying you're shocked to see Halliburton giving money to the Bush Campaign...

[Kansasdog]

I'm not in the NIMBY group, I just think that this is being pushed through without giving the project due diligence. I have yet to hear if any other parcel have been considered for this project, let alone why this is the best.

Now it comes out that the biggest contributer to the 'Yes on 1' fund is....

the Real Estate company that owns the parcels!!

[Brian]

Lenrod,

I think you're right...and $75MM would probably be enough to fund that wall you're talking about. That way, JoCo can keep out noisy kids, business persons, and anything else that might lead to progress around here.

Conventions, Sports and Leisure International did the study that lead to the $24MM in annual projected revenue...they could answer those questions better than I can. So, the big IF is only IF it gets passed.