Ram23

SORTA has already given a written commitment, I wonder who he expects to put what in writing? Does he still actually think someone is going to sign on the dotted line to pay for an indeterminable cost for the next 30 years? He can't be that obtuse, can he?

Where’s that Photoshop of Cranley as Napoleon? Could this meeting be his Waterloo? Will Flynn be our Prussians and annihilate Cranley’s last chance? Can we exile Cranley to Lawrenceburg?

$25,000 isn't enough, but perhaps Garvin will miss that in 10 years when he has unpaid medical bills, no savings, and works at a WalMart. People can nitpick at the rules and go back and forth if they want, but what it comes down to is the overarching theme that people should be blocking, and tackling, not purposely trying to cause injury.

The closed minds of Cranley and his posse will look at two numbers out of the entire report: $68 million more to complete at this point, $16-$48 to cancel. They will disregard the introduction pages that say ROI and future litigation costs were not considered. Litigation costs could easily make canceling more expensive, and if one can grasp the concept of ROI (starting to think Flynn, Murray, etc. can't), the numbers don't even come close to comparing.

Audit available here: http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/streetcar/linkservid/3DD016CB-E3D7-BAFC-0AFA5E3DE1795E87/showMeta/0/

There's a plan, the new mayor just wants to do things like give everyone another trash can with the money instead.

Flynn is absolutely in Cranley's back pocket, but I wonder what the reason is? You can just tell by the way he speaks, I don't think he believes the misguided statements that Cranley makes, but he goes along with it anyway.

Who cares about changing Cranley's mind? Hopefully SORTAs offer is enough to change Flynn and Mann's minds, and in essence take the "operating cost" figure out of the equation entirely. We will all now if those two are reasonable or in Cranley's pocket come tomorrow.

I wonder how much they had to may to buy it back? There are bots that auto-buy expired domains that people either forget or choose not to renew. That would have been a smart one for someone to squat on.

I think the general understanding is that NFL rules are becoming more of common sense judgment calls that protect player safety. It is okay to block someone; it’s not okay to purposely pop them in the jaw when they don’t see you coming. I think it’s a result of more pads and protection – the more protected someone feels in their equipment, the more likely they are to lead with their helmet, and hit at full speed with intent to inflict pain rather than make an efficient block or tackle. At first, I hated the new rules that started with QB’s, and now include almost everyone on the field – but they’re growing on me. I want to watch people play football, I don’t like to see cheap shots that end peoples seasons and careers. It’s not like a hockey fight or even boxing, it’s 250+ pounds at full sprint hitting unsuspecting people. The only reason to hit a punter like that in the jaw is to cause injury. On a related note, I still believe the Steelers coaches actively encourage their players to take advantage of cheap shot opportunities. That’s the sort of classlessness that is indicative of the entire city of Pittsburgh.

I can't tell if Chris Finney is simply a huge hypocrite, or really only out for personal gain. He either believes the crap that comes out of his mouth, or just found a niche (suing the City of Cincinnati) that is profitable for him.

I'd think the only way a private source would offer to fund operations is if they were entitled to collect on increased property tax returns within a certain distance of the streetcar. Of course that's basically be the same general concept as the parking deal that Cranley hated so much...

I'm for recall, not because of the streetcar, but to hurt Cranley's future political career. The guy is the definition of the type of person I don't want serving in our government in any capacity. Even if he doesn't get recalled, he's still the guy who had to face Cincinnati's first mayoral recall election in history.

^ Quite possibly the most hypocritical editorial I've ever read in my life. Not only are his words centered around an outdated, cliche political campaign slogan (wonder why he didn't drop a "hope" in there with his change), he literally goes on to describe his idea of "change" as reverting to the status quo of the late 1990's. Whenever Cranley talks, it almost sounds like a Steven Colbert bit - it's like he's trying to lace in hyperbole and satire of himself for humorous effect.

"...and that a negative vote on the charter amendment means that the Cincinnati streetcar project shall not move forward" I don't like that portion. An affirmative vote should mean the streetcar goes forward, but a negative vote should mean the decision rests with council. This amendment could be a de facto streetcar ban if it is shot down. What happens if the independent study changes the vote of Flynn or Mann, and then this charter amendment goes to the polls and loses? It looks like it will be open to public comment, so I supposed I could go make that comment where it matters.

If you read the ORC, you don’t have to actually identify a candidate until after the recall vote is successful. The city council would then set a future date for an election, between 30-40 days from that point. You have the next 20 days to gather signatures and put names on the ballot, and anyone can do that so you’d probably have Jim Berns and Noble rounding up signatures as well. It seems like you could get a candidate on board behind closed doors, and then only announce upon the recall being successful. You’d be in a pinch for signatures in 20 days but I’d imagine the momentum would be palpable at that point.

It seems to me a recall election should be possible per Ohio Revised Code 705.92. INAL, but The Cincinnati City Charter has no provisions for recall, which means state law would apply. A year has to pass before the recall can occur, but I think the option should definitely be on the table should the streetcar (amongst other things) sit in ruins in a years’ time. Even if unsuccessful, the recall should hamper Cranley’s future career and keep the world safe from him.

If anything, Gee being in bed with the state government and going to bat to purposefully harm the University of Cincinnati shows where the real inferiority complex lies. He was literally beating up other schools instead of building up OSU. Outside of a few OSU alum, the majority of the state is glad Gee is no longer on the payroll.

I've stopped paying attention to WCPO ever since they started using Kevin Osborne for all their so called in-depth articles. I'm glad I won't even be tempted to click now.

I'm sure Prus will, and pay their workers to do nothing for 7 days, then start unemployment pay, and then send that massive bill to the City, amongst the myriad of other change orders and outstanding balances.

It really is disturbing how Mann and Flynn are so obviously doing what they've been told to do by Cranley. What is being offered to them that makes them so willing to sacrifice their own beliefs on such an important issue? Will they continue to parrot orders from Cranley all four years? It terrifies me that such blatant corruption and croneyism was on display day one in office. This administration apparently thinks they are infallible. What is going to happen when they finally have to confront all of the debt they are creating? Does Cranley secretly have a genius fiscally responsible plan for the city? I highly doubt it. I desperately want to embrace this new administration and back them up on their decisions. All they have to do is move beyond this ridiculously shortsighted attack. Flynn and Mann are extremely disappointing. I suppose being Vice Mayor is Mann’s excuse, and although 99% of people don’t care about that position, I’m sure it’s marginally ego inflating for someone who is far past his prime. I can’t figure out what Flynn is getting, but as of now he’s coming off as full of more BS than even Smitherman, as he’s nowhere near as good as Smitherman at hiding the fact. His meandering rant about increasing rates over time made it rather apparent. He either doesn’t know what inflation is, doesn’t understand that future costs are typically calculated in today’s dollars to make sense, or was being purposely misleading while addressing a crowd that knows far better – he’s either ignorant or arrogant, a trait he has in common with the mayor. His other main point (before he accidentally voted for the streetcar), was that costs now are higher than the original 2007 plan, so the ROI is no longer valid. Again he illustrates a willful ignorance of inflation, coupled with what probably really is ignorance of the concept of cost escalation. People can say what they want about Smitherman, Murray, Winburn, and even Cranley, but people voting for them know what they were getting. Flynn, in my opinion, is more full of crap than anyone on council.

I only saw it in passing, but was that Flynn at Cranley's side today at the press conference? Those two are going to be thick as thieves for the next 4 years. Cranley is going to feed him scraps and he'll likely vote however Cranley wants. They're both UC College of Law guys from back in the day, we probably should have seen this coming. It's such a clear-cut sellout, too. The 2011 quote above makes that painfully obvious - somehow the ROI made sense then, but doesn't now. PG's flip on the issue was based on actual data, whereas Flynn's flip is exactly contrary to new data.

Both Winburn and Flynn have said they want to look more closely at the numbers, although they both also said they think construction should pause. I doubt Monday's meeting is going to result in any cancellation ordinance, but it might include an ordinance to pause and independently review the project. Hopefully the four supporters on council can convince one more person that a pause is a de facto cancellation, and we can get an independent contractor to review the project while it continues. I would think that even in the event a "pause and review" ordinance gets passed, we would start gathering signatures for a referendum? It would seemingly just have to have language that forces the city to honor all existing streetcar contracts, and preventing them from passing any legislation that hampers construction in any way. Something broad like that would be nice, so even in the event Cranley parks his car in the way of a delivery truck, the city opens itself up to lawsuit.

What are the chances the CAF vehicles Cincinnati is getting fit in the existing subway tunnels? Aside from the fact that the existing platforms would have to be lowered, are the dimensions and radii large enough? Gut instinct tells me the dimensions are big enough but I'm not sure about the radius of the southernmost turn under Central Parkway... Theoretically the stops at Brighton, Linn, and Liberty could be ignored to save money, with a terminal station at Race and Central Parkway providing transfer to the streetcar. The central platforms at Race would seemingly be the cheapest to lower and rebuild.

A Republican is disappointed in a Democrat. Finally, some normalcy has returned to this situation! Yeah, PG-13 will probably be running against a local Republican for a higher office within a few years, so that alliance was going to be short-lived from the get go, else the Republicans are just helping their own competition.