Michael L. Redmond

Chris, That would be great if you could. Ask him about lots of 50, 2 color on blue polo and Tshirts (anyone have a preference on the color of shirt?) Front and back printing, front will only be the Vitality Logo and the back will say OTR Volunteer Ambassador. Also, I wanted to post this from Randy and Jeff Brandt who coordinated the explanation of the program. This is the posting that Amber was referring to. Background: Over-the-Rhine residents and owners formed Vitality Over-the-Rhine (Vitality OTR) in 2006. Our historic area is experiencing dramatic, positive change; Vitality OTR seeks to build upon this exciting progress. For 2008, we are bringing together the residents, business owners, visitors, neighborhood organizations, and anyone who cares about Over-the-Rhine to (1) make immediate improvements in safety and cleanliness issues; (2) collect information from home, business, and condo owners on their long-term vision for Over-the-Rhine; and (3) seek funding to make that common vision a permanent reality. You can help with that first goal by joining the Volunteer Ambassador Program and become an OTR Ambassador now. Overview: Where? The boundaries of the Volunteer Ambassador Program are simply the boundaries of Over-the-Rhine. When? Volunteers are encouraged to engage in ambassador activities as often as possible. But the program imposes no specific requirements for service. Volunteers should simply wear their OTR Ambassador shirts whenever they are in Over-the-Rhine. This could be for a night out on Main Street, some shopping at Findlay Market, or simply attending one of the many events that take place in the neighborhood (Midpoint Music Festival, Final Fridays, Second Sundays on Main, etc). *If you are in need of service hours, Vitality OTR coordinartors will be able to certify the hours that you log as a Volunteer OTR Ambassador. What? Volunteer OTR Ambassadors will be asked to be one thing---a visible representative for Over-the-Rhine. You will be provided with materials so that you can offer directions, recommendations, or advice to someone looking for assistance. Simply put on your Volunteer OTR Ambassador shirt and a smile, and then do what you normally do in Over-the-Rhine, including shopping, eating, or just walking around. Why? Over-the-Rhine is experiencing a renaissance. Our residents, businesses, and visitors are looking for ways to ensure that current progress is maintained for the long term. As Volunteer OTR Ambassadors, you will both see and be seen. Not only will you be the mobile "eyes on the street" (that statistics show go a long way to improving an area) but also someone that may be approached for information or help. This is your chance to be a part of something special that is going on in Over-the-Rhine. Personal Information: Please email the following information to Randy Simes at Vitality Over-the-Rhine: [email protected] 1 Name 2 Email Address 3 Phone Number (what you'll be using while volunteering) 4 Shirt Size

I was going to contact Bryan this week. We just got pricing from OSO on Main and we would like to keep it in OTR if possible.

Does anyone have any good contacts to get shirts printed up?

touché! Very cool video.

I agree with you however it was public housing that had been proposed for the Banks.

Just a lot of Vivarin, can't stand the coffee. This conversation about Section 8 vouchers vs project based has gone a lot further than I had anticipated. Government can regulate a market, which is fine and good, without being an active participant in the market. The government has taxing powers, however taxing of certain items over another in order to influence one product type over another or to manipulate demand is not because they are just trying to pay for basic services. If that were the only concern, then have a fair, across the board tax that is equal to everyone one and on everything. You really cut to the heart of the matter though in that tax should be a funding mechanism for essential services, not a market steering tool. A free market is a market that is allowed to function without manipulation from an external force ie government. Once again, the governments job is to regulate a market to insure that it is fair and can function properly for all. But what is going on in what we are discussing here is participation as a force to manipulate both supply and demand of market segments. That is not a "freely" functioning market. Ok, if you want to use that example and apply it back then would the government purchasing large blocks of stocks, discounting them and then making them available to only a specific group of people who could not (and perhaps should not) participate in the market at its current price be a free market? And what does that do to forces that should be affecting cost?. Is that market then more or less "free"? Remember, this is exactly what has happened in the past with the project based section 8 program. It was what it was and has now changed to vouchers which in my opinion is a better system, but does not change whether the market is any more or less freely functioning, it is the same. Actually the cost I described were property taxes that are primarily to pay for our school system that has nothing to do with the regulation of the market. Even that puts a premium on one location over another and can to be abated to influence demand for one location over another and up till last year benefited one product over another as well (new const 15 year, rehab 10 year). Now that is the governments job. But keep in mind that I was objecting to the use of the term free market as it applies to section 8 vouchers vs project based section 8. If what you said above was all that the government did, and the courts did nothing but insure this then yes, it would be a free market. But when the government is an active participant then no, it is not a free market as you described it so eloquently above. Now don't get me wrong, I am not complaining about the market as it is, but lets not delude ourselves into thinking it is something that it is not. A government that can manipulate, is a government that can be manipulated itself. LK, I wrote this one before my caffeine.

First sentence first. Government intervention into any market by definition reduces the freedom of that market. Second, rental was one of the markets in question until subsidies came up as it applies to the Q and other developments. Third, I am not sure who said they are being coerced to accept vouchers. Fourth, what we are complaining about is the encouragement and discouragement of property uses in different areas by the gov. and how this does lessen the freedoms of the market because it is governmental, not market forces that are doing the influencing. Ok, let me retract number three to a point. Low income tax credits. Model has a few that they have rehabbed using these tax credits under the agreement that they keep that building low income for a period of up to 15 years. Does the market get to dictate who occupies the building? Does the market get to dictate what the rent is? If this were a "free market" then we would not have to distinguish daily that this buidling is or is not "market rate". In OTR they are also mostly historic buildings meaning they have additional requirements they must meet when rehabbing the buildings. Someone once said on here that Compliance=$ and $=additional strings being attached. Its a vicious cycle. You are not taxed on the interest portion of your personal home loan which is meant to be an inducement to participate in one market over another. I do not see how this goes to your argument as this simply illustrates that the gov is the big shiny glove over the invisible hand . We still pay property tax, fines, meet building, zoning and historic codes, subject to seizure and or imprisonment for non compliance to any of those. So does the market dictate what is built where? Not entirely. Free? Not exactly.

That came out of a recomendation of the Mulberry/McMicken/Main Safety Sector after seeing its effectiveness at the Library.

Well I was following you up to this point. Much of the reason that these projects have to be subsidized (especially Q) is to offset the restrictions and thus added cost that gov has placed on the redevelopment, or development in the first place. Compliance=$ and $=additional strings being attached. So in that sense yes, there is no free market because it is primarily governmental forces that drives what we have to do down here on dev. vs. the market dictating. Ironically, the Q was made both possible and necessary because of subsidies.

I would not say that. First, I wouldn't call any program that pays for any portion of your rent "free market". Second, you are assigning fault to the program by pointing out the shortcomings of the individual. I see the point that you are making and would break that into two problems, both that can be associated with those either in or out of the section 8 voucher program. The renter mentality, whether it is "low income" or not generally is different than that of an owner who is basically married to the property and has a financial loss if they destroy the place. As for the owners, some people simply stretch themselves to a point that they can only afford the mortgage and not the upkeep. Just because you can afford to make monthly payments does not necessarily mean that you can replace a roof if need be or hire in a painter every couple of years to keep the house looking fresh. Those problems are not just confined to section 8 voucher recipients. The real problem with this program and most other gov. entitlement programs is that there is not enough of an incentive to get out of it. The move away from a project based system however was definitely a step in the right direction and helped decentralize poverty, crime and the hopelessness that people felt in the inner cities of America. It also removed the foot that was firmly placed on the back of the communities like OTR and the West End and you are seeing a resurgence of communities like ours at exactly the same time HUD made the change. This was not just a coincidence.

The hell it did. What are the calls for service now in those locations relative to the what it was? The project based housing itself had a devastating impact on the residents and the surrounding neighborhoods, their destruction is what allowed for these people to seek a better life and the neighborhood to revitalize. And to put forth a proposal for any part of the Banks to be subsidized is missing the point of the whole program. This is suposed to help people get back on their feet and close the gap in rent in order to provide a housing safety net--not put them on prime river front property. Hell, give me a voucher! Next we can push for Jean Robert to accept food stamps. There should be a difference in compassion and lunacy, but this proposal sure does blur those lines. Oneglove was correct, he knows better and says things like this for political reasons because of the venue that he happened to be in at the time (put him at a Home Builders function and get him to make the same statement). And Witte is no different in that he has to say stuff like this because of his organization demands him push an agenda. Common sense will prevail. Politics... plain, simple and mindboggling.

I think this is a step or two down the road. First, I would like to see the community engage these locations and try and work something out but if that doesn't work then I say no hold barred. At the same time we could install a camera like we did last year pointing at the entrance of Chiefs. Turn on the speakers on Ball Furniture South piping out some Opera over top Jordans, getting ambassadors on the ground and residents calling and complaining if they see anything even remotely suspicious.

1132, Jordans (now at Circle A) and Chiefs are all in our sights now. One thing that I would like to do and this is something that Chris Zimmerman and I worked out for the Shell station is an agreement not to carry certain items otherwise the community would actively challenge their liquor lic.

Cincinnati City Council Targets Liquor Permits Reported by: Jay Warren Photographed by: Jeremy Glover, Eric Clajus Web produced by: Neil Relyea The Cincinnati city council has brought the hammer down on eight bars and businesses in the city. Don's Corner Pub in Price Hill, First Note Cafe in Walnut Hills and N-and-M Mini Mart downtown are three business whose liquor permits were not renewed. "I want them to realize that a liquor license is a privilege," said council member Laketa Cole. Here is a link to where Martins is located in OTR. http://maps.google.com/maps?f=l&hl=en&q=martins+bar&jsv=107&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=49.490703,92.8125&ie=UTF8&cd=1&near=W+Mcmicken+Ave,+Cincinnati,+Hamilton,+Ohio+45202,+United+States&geocode=0,39.118330,-84.518950&ll=39.113596,-84.513423&spn=0.011937,0.022659&z=16&iwloc=A

Let me ask you this. You mentioned Price Hill and some other communities on the West Side of town being impacted by the development here in OTR by way of increased crime etc. Why are they going to these specific places? Why not some others? Not everyone is seeing a spike in crime or homeless people sleeping in the parks. Now why did places like OTR, the West End that were once thriving communities become the haven for poverty and crime beginning 40 plus years ago? Answer those two questions and I believe that you will hopefully come up with two very different answers. Much of the problems of crime, poverty, and the establishment of the regional capital for social services can be placed at the feet of government social policy that has since changed. These problems were forced on inner cities nation wide by an attempt to corral and contain social problems and then began the rise of the suburb. The issues today with the movement of some of the plight that you stated to specific communities is not because it is being forced there, but there is a vacuum for some reason. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out that there are a host of reasons that people are not just able, but choose to move to specific areas and feel a level of impunity when engaging in the same behavior that has historically been accepted to a degree in OTR. OTR has stepped up and said that we will no longer accept drug dealers on every corner. We have a citizenry that will no longer tolerate prostitution outside their front door. We have a group of people who simply say we will take a chance and invest in OTR and will rehab homes, volunteer time, donate money, and go way beyond what the average resident of any other of Cincinnati's 52 communities and say we live, eat and breath OTR. We are willing to give this type of commitment to our neighborhood and because of this a drug dealer or a prostitute no longer feels they can operate down here without being arrested in 5 minutes then where do they choose to go, and why? Someplace they feel safe. Someplace they feel they are not going to be confronted by an active and engaged group of people who drew the line in the sand and said no more. So once again, to all of the places who are "loosing" I say STEP UP! We did.

I brought this up at the Merchants of Main meeting and it seemed to be well received. I got into a side discussion with one of the owners who asked who we were targeting to volunteer. It became an interesting exercise in going through the thought process of why different people would volunteer for this, where they were from and what the community as a whole would get out of it. Initially he thought that current stakeholders, whether they be residents or people who worked down here would make the best Ambassadors but as we continued discussing it, people from outside of OTR who are perhaps students or anyone with a general interest in seeing this community turn around would not only be a benefit to us for getting out information, but it would also be a learning experience for them as well. So if you are a student, a resident, a worker, or just someone who wants to see OTR be a safer, cleaner, and friendlier place, contact Randy or the Vitality Office at [email protected] and join this program. We are trying to make it as easy, fun and flexible for any volunteers so you can commit as much or as little time as can.

Here is where your idea of the problem diverges from mine. See, I believe that the safety and cleanliness is the problem. When I moved to OTR I never set out to cure all of the problems of everyone whether they need a job or trying to kick a drug problem. I wanted to first and foremost have a safe and clean neighborhood that I was proud to say I was a part of. That being the goal, it is easy to see the steps that are necessary to achieve it and those steps are well documented in this and other threads and hopefully evident through my actions and the actions of others. Do we need to revamp the mental health in this country, sure. But the fight to see OTR as an attraction that will draw people of all walks of life and create a feeling of safety, security and cleanliness to bring them back is a much more attainable, near term goal that I am fighting for. We get too caught up in the macro and say that until we completely change the United States policy on narcotics or mental health or homelessness and poverty that our efforts here in OTR are for not. Fight for those changes on a national level, but I will fight for the changes like making sure that our neighborhood is simply a neighborhood that we can all be proud of. There will still be poverty in the world, there will still be people who are mentally instable, there will still be alchoholics, drug abusers, child molesters, murderers, rapist, and every other ill you can possibly imagine, they just will not be here in OTR and that my friend is a start.

It is the responsibility of each person, each street, each neighborhood to make that place the best that it can be. OTR is not in the business of dealing with the rehabilitation of people or to solve all of societies ills (although you would think it was with 108 social services in 110 blocks). It is to provide a safe and clean environment to its residents to live, work and play. I hear this all the time that just by moving them you aren't fixing the problem...since when did someones inablility to find a job or unwillingness to break a heroin addiction fall solely on the shoulders of OTR? The rest of the city has pushed these people into a community of containment, so we are now simply releasing them from that defacto prison that has been built for them over the past 40 years and we will do so unapologetically. To all of the neighborhoods who are "loosing" because of our efforts to clean our community, I say STEP UP! We are and why should we be faulted for the hard work and dedication of people who feel that one of the places that exist on the 10 most endangered historical places deserves better. We will do more, push harder, gain more ground day after day, year after year until OTR is THEE place that people want to live, not forced to live.

Higher rent is not the total solution. Quality tenants is. A landlord has the ability to pick and choose their tenant mix and set standards and criteria through the lease that should prevent this. Unfortunately, in depressed areas, landlords look to anyone who is willing to fill a space so long as they are paying a rent. This in the long term, as more and more landlords in a given area do this destroys the area and pulls their property value down and so begins the spiral. But it can be reversed.

The Volunteer Ambassador program is being put together now. Anyone interested in learning more, email [email protected].

At the time I believe I put out a 'thank you' of sorts for not promoting underage drinking but somehow I do not believe that was his intended message. Perhaps we could take out an add with MADD saying, Deters doesn't want his underaged son going to Main Street and neither should you. See you at 21! Main Street Bar Association and Mothers against Drunk Driving.

Just had a shooting at Woodward and Yukon next to the 1300 block of Main. If we could get buy in from the building owners then we could on one hand create an appropriate tenant mix and on the other hand help the building owner find the tenants and create a win win without ever getting to this point. But we need the buy in. This sumer we will make an incredibly strong push to stop the problems before they ever become a problem. We have Cricket stores at Main, Vine, and another one coming to Liberty. How many do we need in a community? And that is not the only problem store.

If I remember correctly he also said that he took the keys away from his son when he wanted to go to Main St.. A very public way of saying that the new bars that had just opened on Main St were unsafe to go to. "Citing Rudy Giuliani’s anti-crime initiatives in New York City" Did Giuliani say that New York should be avoided until the problems were all solved? We have a two pronged approach down here, enforcement and development. Deters hurt us on the development side when he told perspective buyers and patrons that OTR was unsafe. Giuliani he is not.

I saw the "consider that" response and had some great counters about the streetcar but watch the original "consider this" on the channel 19 website. He makes it sound like nothing is going on in OTR whatsoever and that it is full of abandoned buildings with no development whatsoever. Now I realize this is an opinion piece but the facts here are not debatable. OTR is in one of the biggest redevelopments that Cincinnati has ever seen. Not a mention of 3CDC, Gateway, Main, SCPA, Art Academy, Findlay Mrkt, Jean Robert or any of the other new stores moving in--but only showing borded up buildings in the background and saying the city needs to do something about it. Opinions are opinions but the facts are also the facts and he had to drive past the Q to get to the buidlings that he showed to prove a flawed point. http://www.fox19.com/Global/category.asp?C=65470 under "vacant buildings" I went a step further and contacted the Chamber and 3CDC so hopefully it will be a stronger response than just fodder for his little "opinion" piece.

^1132 and the ones I mentioned above are destination problems. In that I mean that each draws all of the negative elements including public intoxication, drug sales and buys, loitering, and all of the perceptions that goes along with each of those realities into one concentrated place. If we can close the destinations it doesn't get rid of the people causing the problem, but at least it disperses it. Take each of the problem areas in OTR right now. Corner of 12 and Race, Corner of E. Clifton and Lang, Corner of 12 and Main, Corner of McMicken and Walnut, and formerly on Vine and I am going to say 15th. First you have 1132 Bar, Chiefs, Jordans, Martin's Bar, Cricket Store (which has now moved to Main and 14th). There is a direct correlation between the crime and the business that enables the crime by way of providing a destination and safehaven.