At least as reported by Fox4kc, Edgemoor managing director Geoffrey Stricker has been quietly pitching his new single terminal design to Kansas City voters who have less interest in the new terminal’s cost and convenience than they do in their own economic interests.
Fox4kc headlined its piece, “Edgemoor takes new, single terminal plan for KCI to the people.” It seems clear, however, that Edgemoor is taking its pitch to “the people” least likely to use the airport. The meeting Fox4kc covered, for instance, took place at the Kansas City Police Department’s South Patrol’s Division on Kansas City’s far southeast side.
What is curious about the Fox4kc report is that neither Stricker nor the people interviewed spoke at all about the subject that most concerns the people who use the airport regularly, its convenience. Nor did anyone interviewed express any opposition to a single terminal or any affection for the current design.
The main Edgemoor pitch seems to be this: “If you don’t fly, you don’t pay, so there’s no tax increases required to the city in any way, shape or form. All the funding comes directly from the airport.” Stricker spoke instead about the “incredible opportunity for job creation” and, a little too obviously, about “the legacy impact of helping small minority and women owned businesses grow their businesses.”
The strategy seems obvious on the face of it. Edgemoor, with the city’s blessing, is attempting to convince minority voters in particular that a new terminal is in their best interest because other people are going to pay for it. In the process, Stricker made it clear that fliers from throughout the metro are indeed going to foot the bill for this terminal whether they want it or not.
Will fliers get their money’s worth? Unlikely. The design that Stricker presented does not address either of the two real limitations of a single terminal: long walks to gates and, worse, a compressed area to pick up and drop off passengers. When the question of security was raised at the meeting Fox4kc covered, Stricker gave a vague answer that did not address the fact that a single terminal is inevitably more vulnerable to a mass attack.
