2016 was a year of mixed signals regarding the ongoing discussion concerning the future of Kansas City International Airport. In other words, it was just like 2015, 2014, 2013…
Southwest Airlines executives and TSA flip-flopped from their “Keep KCI the way it is” opinions given to the mayor’s KCI task force in 2014. Not surprisingly, no one in the media (other than here) questioned why. Yet, the single-terminal initiative still belly-flopped as the mayor pulled the plug due to insurmountable public opinion against it. Multiple airlines said they could not and would not expand KCI without a new terminal – and then proceeded to add several new non-stop routes to both domestic and international destinations. Mark VanLoh “retired” in his mid 50s as both Director of Aviation and official single-terminal lightning rod and is now consulting. Infrastructure improvements previously said to be undoable are now being done by his replacement, Pat Klein, a man with no previous aviation management experience but lots of experience in City Hall.
Traffic at KCI continued to grow every month and is finally approaching levels enjoyed before the 2008 economic crash. During that peak year of 2007, KCI operated out of three terminals. For the past three years though, and for questionable reasons, operations have been squeezed into two. And while this has created higher than necessary crowding during peak times, of the kind seen at other airports, KCI continues to be the model of convenience travelers love – even during the recent holiday rush as reported here.
A typical day in Terminal A in 2013
Looking ahead to 2017, it’s important to increase the transparency regarding KCI. Terminal A will have been mothballed for three years in January. When was the last time the City Council and the public were allowed in to see how this important city asset has been cared for? As traffic continues to increase in 2017, we may need it back online before we agree on the best long-term plan for KCI.
It’s also clear that City Hall recognizes that they’ve lost credibility on this issue. The city’s main PR tool, the tax-abated Kansas City Star, seems to be attempting to pivot the conversation by portraying “the business community” as the new lead cheerleader for a single-terminal. Interestingly, nearly every business traveller I’ve spoken with is against a single-terminal. The former head of the KC Chamber claimed the opposite to the mayor’s task force citing a member survey. But I could not find a single chamber member who recalled even seeing a survey including a banker who claimed to be on the chamber board. If such a survey exists, where is it? It certainly didn’t agree with the polling the mayor did last year before he pulled the plug.
If we are going to successfully move this conversation toward a solution satisfactory to airlines, passengers, investors and voters, we need to make 2017 the year that the smoke, mirrors, egos and hidden agendas give way to honest and open win-win dialog.
If we are going to successfully move this conversation toward a solution satisfactory to airlines, passengers, investors and voters, we need to make 2017 the year that the smoke, mirrors, egos and hidden agendas give way to honest and open win-win dialog.
Hmmm….not sure this conversation will ever be satisfactory to all stakeholders. Way too many possibilities being thrown around along with misinforming the public along the way (both sides).
Having contributed to this site, there are many options being discussed here and not one is a clear consensus.
Options
1) More “honest” conversations
2) Do nothing
3) Crawford plan
4) Re-open Terminal A
Other than more conversations, I am not sure how any of the remaining options will keep MCI fresh and relevant for future generations. Crawford, potentially, but a napkin sketch needs more substance.
Why doesn’t the Chamber set up a time to view and discuss the Crawford remodel plans which would save 50%? If the Chamber would get behind a plan the voters support this could get done in 2017! Why are they following the mayor’s poor judgement and fighting the voting taxpayers? If in fact they are.
The subsidised KC Star and Jolie Justus appear to be the ones pushing the single terminal. Of course the airlines want to be in control so they can determine which airlines go and come into KC.
This comment doesn’t make sense as it contradicts a lot of what is being said by all of the “travelers” who love KCI. They don’t want any change according to the naysayers. Why would they support Crawford, the city or any other plan if they like it the way it is?