osogato

^ simple majority, I believe

Language for the charter ammendment is decided by council today. Anyone going down for the meeting? Any idea when we will see the finalized language?

In Luken's "defense", he is playing both sides. He says that it will either be successful and siphon off Metro's riders, or it will be unsuccessful and completely empty. Spoken like a true politician

Let fountain guide streetcar vote By Caleb Faux • August 25, 2009 http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090825/EDIT02/908250357 I commend The Enquirer's editorial opposing the proposed charter amendment directed at street cars ("Poison pill amendment is about less, not 'more,' " Aug. 9). One online reader's response got me to thinking. The commenter derisively referenced moving the fountain on Fountain Square 50 feet, as if somehow the city one day suddenly decided to spend millions of dollars to move the fountain a short distance. At the time that decision was controversial. Some even suggested placing the matter on the ballot for the voters to decide. That situation provides a great example of how placing decisions on the ballot might not work to our benefit. As a Planning Commission member, I was asked to vote on that issue. At first I was a bit skeptical. I liked the old Fountain Square. But as I came to understand the details of the changes proposed and the reasons for them, I changed my view and voted to support the move. It was not simply moving the fountain; there was much more to it. The fountain had to be removed from the square to allow for reconstruction of the garage beneath. When it came time to put the fountain back, where it went was an open question. The design team proposed a new location, arguing it would make the square more functional. They made a convincing case, though the traditionalists remained dubious; probably some still are. But today the evidence speaks for itself. Anyone who's been downtown on a summer evening over the last two years knows the redesigned Fountain Square is a huge success. The designers were right. The square is much more active and vibrant now than it has been at any time since the 1970s. The new design allows for a performance space in the way the old didn't. It attracts people and has become downtown's public living room. But had we placed that decision on the ballot, my guess is the change would never have happened. Not because voters aren't intelligent, but because in most cases they don't have time to study the details and so they opt to maintain the status quo; it's comfortable. Had that happened, we would all have missed out on a good thing. In that situation an informed Planning Commission and City Council made the right decision and the city is a better place for it. That's the way our system is supposed to work. Caleb Faux of Hyde Park is chairman of the Cincinnati Planning Commission and executive director of the Hamilton County Democratic Party.

Some fairly unbiased reporting from the Enquirer on the effects of the anti-rail ballot initiative: http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20090806/NEWS01/908090304/Special+Report++On+opposite+tracks

^Excellent article! Well Done!

We shall see... For some reason they didn't mention that part of the speech in their article. Somehow I'm not expecting a major turnaround. The facts are something the Enquirer doesn't seem too terribly concerned about.

Doesn't sound like much new information came out of Mallory's press conference today, judging from the Enquirer's article. They've added a poll on the story though. Show your support: http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20090728/NEWS0108/307240040/1055/NEWS/Mayor+touts+streetcars

Judging from your comments, I'd say that's spot on!

That's a typical Cincinnati attitude. It's worked in every other city, but there's a chance it might not work here, so we shouldn't try it... If this project gets done, I sincerely hope it could start to change that attitude of fear and failure that permeates this city. It's very frustrating and depressing.

For being an supposedly "unbiased" news source, the Enquirer sure makes it painfully obvious that they want this charter ammendment to pass. From refusing to call it anything but the "streetcar issue", to burying positive news about it in the back of the paper. What a joke!

It's in the Politics/Government section on the website. It's in this category on the main page of the "News" and "Enquirer" sections, but you are right, it's not on the main Cincinnati.com page.

I'm sure the city would be asked to throw in some money, even if it is only a marginal amount. If not for the rail improvement itself, then probably for stations/stops, or something along those lines. Even if they only asked for $2, it would have to go to a vote.

Notice the wording of the title on this article. The Enquirer refuses to accurately represent the proposed charter ammendment. The title would lead one to believe Strickland opposes bringing streetcars to Cincinnati. Ridiculous. Strickland: streetcar initiative potentially detrimental Posted by benfischer at 7/15/2009 1:45 PM EDT on Cincinnati.com Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland first learned of the potential Cincinnati city charter amendment to require voter approval on a streetcar and other future passenger train projects today, and he's dubious. Strickland, in Loveland to talk about the state budget, was careful to not explicitly take a position on the possible initiative, but said it could potentially exclude Cincinnati from a regional effort, to the city's detriment. http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?Category=blog02&plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3aec38bb2b-982e-46ba-819a-da01a547e8eaPost%3a56bde57a-df4f-436c-bde8-4f9901ccd3d3&sid=sitelife.cincinnati.com

Yes, I meant that the Enquirer is still referring to the anti-passenger rail measure simply as the streetcar measure. Even though they clarify in the text, the headline is misleading.

^ still calling it the "streetcar proposal" i see...

Didn't Leslie Ghiz introduce a measure in the proposal to require the streetcar fare to be no lower than Metro's rates? If so, now that she doesn't support the project, can we just throw that out?

David Pepper has joined Todd Portune's opposition to the anti-rail charter ammendment: Commissioners Pepper, Portune oppose streetcar petition Posted by jessicabrown at 5/21/2009 12:05 PM EDT on Cincinnati.com Hamilton County Commissioners David Pepper and Todd Portune this week attacked a proposed charter amendment aimed at blocking Cincinnati's plan to build a streetcar system in the city. A coalition of organizations called We Demand A Vote is petitioning to get the charter amendment on the November ballot. The amendment would require voters' approval before public money is spent on the streetcar system or other passenger rail transportation. The commissioners' take issue with the latter part of that amendment. It would slow needed regional rail projects, they said. Read the proposed charter amendment here Read an Enquirer account of the streetcar issue here Pepper and Portune agreed that if the voters want to vote on streetcars, they have that right. But they think the petitions are "poorly drafted" and would "bottle up all kinds of countywide development and transportation enhancements," according to a news release. Projects such as the Eastern Corridor Transportation project and the Ohio high-speed rail link from Cincinnati to Cleveland would "grind to a halt," according to the release. "Its supporters say its just about streetcars but the language covers much more than that and will put the voters of Cincinnati in the middle of virtually every countywide development that has a transit element of any kind," Portune said in a news release. Pepper noted that if the amendment is passed, the rail link would likely end at Sharonville instead of coming all the way to Cincinnati. "The 3C and D connector will become the Cleveland to Sharonville connector if this thing passes," he said.

While it is unfortunate that Leslie Ghiz decided to tow the party line and oppose the streetcars, she at least did say she was "totally opposed" to COAST's anti-rail ammendment: "It's a bad idea,'' Ghiz said. ""Your recourse, if you don't like what city council does, is to not elect us."

I like how the CFP has dubbed the charter ammendment the "Anti-Progress" Ammendment. That's good.

That article has been updated so you can vote on whether or not you support the streetcar. Vote! http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20090513/NEWS01/305130075/1055/NEWS/Will+streetcar+stay+on+track?

Nice to see the Enquirer writing pro-transit articles concerning the streetcar. I'm surprised...

From Mayor Mallory: Dear Cincinnatians for Progress Supporter, Thank you to those of you who joined us at Grammer’s on March 25th for the Cincinnatians for Progress kick-off event. The enthusiasm in the room was electrifying. I was encouraged to see so many people who believe in the progress in our city and are committed to fighting to keep that progress going. We have seen a lot of progress in Cincinnati over the last few years. However, once again, the naysayers in our community are gearing up to get in the way of progress in our city. They are proposing a ballot initiative that would amend the city charter and threaten the development of the streetcar. As a supporter of Cincinnatians for Progress, you are part of the solution. Together, we will defeat that ballot initiative and we will make it clear that the citizens of our city want to see Cincinnati continue to grow and prosper. We need your help. Send this email to your email list and encourage them to sign up to start receiving email updates from Cincinnatians for Progress by going to our website at http://www.cincinnatiansforprogress.com/. Please also ask them to join the Cincinatians for Progress Facebook Group by clicking here: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=74337497384&ref=ts As Cincinnatians for Progress fights that dangerous proposal your involvement will be crucial to ensure that we continue to move our city forward. Thank you for your commitment to the future of our great city. Mark Mallory Mayor

The Beacon's latest alternative to streetcars: People Movers http://www.cincinnatibeacon.com/index.php/contents/comments/parry_people_movers_for_cincinnati/ If streetcars don't meet "The Dean's" sacred three pillars of sustainability, I fail to see how the people mover would. They may be slightly better for the environment with alternative energy sources, but this isn't proven, and neither is the claim that the system would be significantly less expensive to build and operate.

COAST claims that "the special account set up to receive donated streetcar funds continues to have a zero balance." I'm not sure if Duke has made their payment yet. Are they still waiting for approval from PUCO, or some other regulatory body?