Thanks for the free parking

Good for Sedgwick County commissioners for heeding community criticism of a proposed parking fee at the Kansas Coliseum and finding another way to raise revenue. Coming on top of the property-tax hike, arena sales tax and jail fee plan, the parking fee seemed like overload that could end up hurting bookings and attendance. The alternative — tripling the 50-cent facility fee on each Select-A-Seat ticket to $1.50 starting May 1 — is nothing to cheer. But with national services such as Ticketmaster charging $10-$20 in fees per ticket, the fee hike seems reasonable.
Posted by Rhonda Holman

5 Comments

  1. JWink
    Posted April 13, 2007 at 6:19 am | Permalink

    County Commissioners Dave Unruh, Tom Winters and Tim Norton should be thanking Sedgwick County taxpayers.

    Taxpayers pay each of them somewhere between $70,000 and $100,000 each year depending on extras, perks and snacks for meeting once per week for coffee and giving their “visions and dreams.”

    Remember, THEY DO IT FOR YOU.

  2. Red Coal Carpet
    Posted April 13, 2007 at 7:43 am | Permalink

    I don’t see what the big deal is about the parking fee. It hasn’t been too long ago that I paid $25 to park for a concert in Dallas at the American Airlines Arena. So whatever measly fee they are going to charge is a bargain!

  3. fleettwood
    Posted April 13, 2007 at 8:44 am | Permalink

    “Thanks for the free parking”

    Shouldn’t this be “Thanks for the $1.50 parking”?

  4. Posted April 13, 2007 at 8:52 am | Permalink

    Fleettwood,

    There are many events at the Coliseum that don’t ticket through Select-A-Seat (it was noted in the article). Parking remains free for all events, even those.

  5. Posted April 13, 2007 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

    Free Parking? Someone is paying for it. . .

    Remind me not to pay attention to WE editorials regarding money/finances. I mean what’s next? More of those great public/private partnerships? That is merely code for ‘tax money back to major campaign contributors’. However I’m sure if that happened that every news story about those ‘partnerships’ would include information about the businesses involved and if they seem to have bought influence. After all you can’t have a complete story without all the big details.

    Which brings about another point in my ramblings. . .Why does the government not demand a share of the profits directly from one of these so-called partnerships? They could do a bond issue paid-off with the actual profits. That way taxpayers would only be asked to effectively co-sign a loan. Getting the money back through ‘increased tax revenue’ is shady at best. Or at best only leading to spending on other projects rather than paying back the so-called public investors.

    End of ramblings. . .Soapbox available