I am of the opinion if the line doesn't extend, it will not be a success long term.
so that's the flaw with, and one reason why i have issue with, the way this was funded. if, for this to be net positive for the city, it requires the extension to be built, then the whole thing should have been voted/approved in whole. the initial line should be able to stand on its own if that's the way the vote was approved. there's no telling what happens in the future or if the extension will be approved. it's easy to say now that without the extension, this won't be successful long term. "well gosh guys, we've come this far and without the extension we won't see the economic impact we promised" - city hall would never admit what you did, it's against fiscal policy, and shockingly, even KCMO has one.