Oh. Did we mention the practice facility?

Yesterday I attended a luncheon with Mayor Barnes as the keynote speaker. Agree or disagree with her policies but you can't argue that she's an accomplished speaker. I was dismayed at a couple of comments she made though. The first was a not so thinly veiled shot at a mayoral candidate saying he was dead wrong in saying the City had offered incentives to the Pittsburgh Penguins. She maintains that it is AEG's responsibility to make the deal and they are the landlord and so on and so forth. While "technically" that's accurate, we do have a vested interest in the lease agreement. We as bond debtors are responsible for any shortfalls in revenue and we also get a part of the profits. I'd say that kind of makes AEG and the City partners. The next comment really threw up my radar. The Mayor mentioned "down the road" it "might be a possibility" that we (this time 'we' means the taxpayers and not AEG) might need to build a practice facility for a hockey or basketball team. WHAT? I have to learn not to be absentmindedly chewing on my ice when I'm listening to City officials talk about economic incentives. Ice down the windpipe really burns! Eric Barton of the Pitch was there and caught the same little mention I did. He scoops all the local media and goes a lot further in his research and actually found out that we (the City and AEG this time) actually toured the Penguins management around looking at potential locations for practice facilities. I love hockey. And I'd love to have a hockey team in KC. But at what price? We're letting a private company negotiate deals and expecting the taxpayers to pick up the tab. This kind of stuff makes my head hurt.