Brutus_buckeye

Barrett is certainly concerned about the tourney but I think his bigger eye is on figuring out a way to get a new arena downtown. he sees the tennis tourney as a way to justify a new downtown arena. I think he could take or leave playing some matches on the FWW caps or just erecting stands at Sawyer Point and utilizing some of those courts. he certainly wants the tourney too, and has heard concerns about the average player not enjoying staying in Mason (no late night amenities, etc) but I think the main goal is to get a new arena.

Also, look at where the Browns stand compared to their peers. Even at 2-2, the losses are both last second losses (Jets loss was just a fluke)and a last second loss to Falcons on a winnable game. They beat the Steelers by 2 scores. Baltimore and Cincinnati have similar pedigrees. I do feel that while very competitive, the Browns are maybe a step behind Cincinnati, Buffalo, Kansas City, Chargers at this point. The main reason is that the offense on those teams is poised to have more quick strike ability when they absolutely need a score. I do not think the Browns are built this way with a more run centric offense and that is what separates them from an elite team to just a contender. They remind me of the Titans from last year. Very good team and can win the division but not super dynamic. Now that may change once Watson comes back, but given his layoff he is going to need a few weeks to shake off the rust and the question is whether there is enough meaningful time left in the season at that point to allow him to do so.

On the flip side, I think Stefanski gets a bit of a raw deal. Look at Carolina and how horrible Baker is doing there. Not that he was excellent in Cleveland, but with Stefanski, he seemed to manage Baker in a way to allow him to excel to above his potential. I think Stefanski should be given credit for this. I think he is doing quite well with Brissett too. Brissett is serviceable but certainly not a franchise QB. I think he is overachieving with the Browns thus far.

There is just too much traffic there now to narrow the street without creating a huge chokehold and problem accessing campus. For all the improvements UC has made, it is still always going to have a large commuter base to it. The Calhoun garage off Jefferson is a main access point for the university. Also, Jefferson offers the path to the hospitals from the South. Adding the MLK exit off 71 is beneficial because it can now direct hospital traffic away from Jefferson but, Jefferson is still a major thruway for the campus area without getting stuck in the short vine area or taking some of the other streets like Eden

Jefferson is such a busy street. It is not the safest to cross if you are not at a cross walk. not sure you could do much about it. I think a pedestrian bridge may be a good option to get people safely over Jefferson. Or maybe a grassy median to break up the distance people need to cross in the heart of traffic. I think it is a lot easier to cross MLK and Clifton around UC then it is to cross Jefferson.

Can only imagine how much better it will get when the rest of the site is built out with the hotel, office complex and sportsbook

Why would it be embarrassing?? He is going to win a second term. Whaley's chances are between slim and none and slim has pretty much left the building. It makes sense to get behind the person who will actually win and be able to direct policy, especially for a lobbying group like a union. Also, Dewine has kept RTW legislation from advancing in Ohio so you figure unions would be supportive of that even if they may not support other policies of the GOP

They do charge for parking. It is in the rents that the companies pay to lease space in the building. Parking has never been free. The question is who should pay, the customers who visit the building or the tenants who rent at the building. In reality, someone is still paying for the parking. I take it you would prefer to subsidize the financially well heeled company who rents the space and charge the individual who visits there a "user fee" instead of putting the burden of the parking on the tenant? Under that theory, do you oppose companies that validate parking for their guests?

Again, why charging for parking is a bad idea here. Uc did not create the path, they are reacting to it. This is a building not an entire city. The path has been created. You may not like the path, but there is no going back from it unless you want to create a lot of pain along the way. No need to cause unneeded suffering

^ Considering the Metro tax had bipartisan support in the County that will not happen. O'Neill is trying to create a name for himself as Smitherman is the likely the frontrunner amongst Republicans.

You would have to think it would be free parking. Most of the buildings in Rookwood and other inner rung are free parking. Given its location, you would figure many of the employees would expect to park for free, and visitors to the building should have that same expectation too. UC owns the building and its goal is to foster collaboration between departments, businesses, etc. It only makes sense that they provide ease of access to them. Think about the location of the building and who will be using it. At the present time, it is not a walkable area. It is on a bus route but most of the employees who use it are not going to ride the bus, the clients who visit there will not ride the bus either. There are no other amenities that are walkable in the area. While urban, it is not quite the urban core or university district. It does not make sense to charge parking in this case. The customers who use the building will eventually vote with their wallets and work elsewhere. Contrast it with the rest of UC or the hospitals. Those facilities are both self contained cities. Charging parking in those garages makes a lot more sense because they offer a walkable area already. Maybe at some point, it would make sense to charge parking at the garage but at present, the economics probably do not dictate that.

Yes, I admit, they could be taller but they fit with the urban canvas that is UC and the hospitals in the area.

I do not know what more you could expect. The site is still being built out too so it will eventually evolve. If they were suburban, they would be surrounded by a sea of parking, that is not the case here. The site is designed to get much more dense. It just has not been built yet.

Not to get too far off topic but, Section 8 units tend to be located in the areas that are not as nice primarily because the property owners in other areas have more options to get good tenants in place without resorting to Section 8. Section 8 tenants are not the problem. They know that if they cause issues, they lose their voucher and will never get it back. For a senior on a fixed income it is a big deal. Problem is that the housing agency is the biggest impediment toward getting people to take Section 8 renters so the only owners who take section 8 are going to be located in bad areas because those property owners know it is worth the headache of dealing with the housing agency to get the rent vs the market rate renter.

They could, but at the end of the day, if you are a contender and are going to challenge for the super bowl you need to beat the best teams. also the season is young. Those other teams could fall flat or get the injury bug. The dynamics could change a lot by the time the begs play them. Who thought they would beat the Steelers twice last year and the ravens and chiefs when looking at their 2021 schedule. Many did not think they could even beat the raiders and broncos when the early schedule came out. So a lot can change by mod season and if you are going to win it all you have to beat the Buffalos and chiefs anyway

Let's look on the bright side. I still think this team is a playoff team. They play sloppy in the first half and put it together in the second half and have lost on game winning field goals both weeks. This was never a team to blow people out, and really most NFL games are not blow outs. Also, keep in mind that while they may be 0-2 the rest of the division lost last week so they are only one game back of everyone. PIttsburgh has the advantage on them but Pittsburgh will not be good this year. I am not worried about Pittsburgh at all. Cleveland just blew a game worse than the Bengals did against Pitt and Cleveland has to be demoralized. Baltimore also blew a game in similar fashion against the Dolphins. Let's keep that in mind. There is only 1 bye in the playoffs so chances are the Bengals would not have gotten it. Also, you see how well it served Tennessee last year anyway. Lets focus on winning the division, one that we are only 1 game back at this point, with no clear divisional favorite.

So, if you went back 3 weeks ago, most people would say that if the Browns started 1-1 it would be a good start. Many thought they would lose to the Panthers and beat the Jets. End of the day, not much is different besides the embarrassing collapse. That stings more for the fan than the player. The next 4 weeks will define the team, if they are bad or decent. At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is the final score. It does not matter how you win or lose, only that you are 1-1 now.

I was not trying to knock Whaley, I was more comparing her star power to say an Obama type who can rise from a State senator to president in a 4 -6 year period. That is obviously a rarity. Even on the local politics level, you could see some of this with someone like PG $ittenfeld before his fall from grace. Aftab Pureval in Cincinnati has some of this but he is still a bit inexperienced and needs more polish (you could see this from his Congressional campaign which was sloppy a few years back). Whaley is more of a grinder and has to work harder for it. She was much more of a party person who worked her way through the local party apperatus to get where she did. I knew her when she was in the treasurers office and certainly she had to grind a bit to get where she has. Whereas, others have the personality to get there quicker, she is much more of a longer build. DeWine is very similar to Whaley in that regard as he was a loyal party servant for a lot of years and paid his dues on the GOP side. Some people have to wait their turns while others can go out and take it when they sense the opportunity.

There is always a negative perception of apartments that people have that makes it difficult to develop them in nice suburbs. No matter what you have the same stories from those opposed to development. 1) It will be a bunch of section 8 housing. If not now, in 10 years when a new owner takes over 2) a bunch of Mexicans will fill the units and there will be 30 people living in a 2 bed apartment. 3) It will overburden the school system with an influx of young families who are not paying property taxes. 4) It will create light pollution, disturb the quality of the surrounding housing in the area and add traffic. All of these are just scare tactics but work. While there is some legitimacy to #4, the rest are just boogie man tactics from prior years. 1) Section 8 will not be there because the price of newly constructed units will be too much for Section 8 to pay. These are not going to be low income units that are built. 2) A new apartment complex and well managed complex makes sure to ensure that only 2 people per bedroom are occupying the apartment. 3) Just because the resident does not directly pay property taxes, these taxes are built into their rent so they are in fact indirectly paying. Section 8 is a decent program on the whole. The problem with Section 8 is not the resident but it is the government agency administering it. Property owners do not like to take Section 8 because of the burdensome bureaucracy created by the local housing agency. That being said, some housing agencies are much better than others. Franklin County is god awful. Hamilton County is pretty poor too. Often times, the border counties are pretty easy to work with. I imagine that Licking county would not be a bad county to work with on Section 8 housing.

Dewine is 74 years old. This is his last election. He has been Prosecutor, Lt Governor, US Senator, state Atty General, and now Governor. In 2026 he will be pushing 80, he pretty much says this is his swan song. I would not put anything into a debate. It would not move the needle much for Whaley in this election. They could debate 3 times in the coming month but she really does not have a shot beyond trying to make it a low single digit loss. There are not enough progressives in the big cities to push her over the top and she is not really trying to run to capture the rural voters. Whaley's best play is to build a name for herself to position herself for 2026 when she takes on Husted or someone like Frank Larose. At that point, it could be a much more competitive race. Look at the prior governor's races where Ohio was competitive. Strickland in 2006 had the benefit of being a well known and popular Congressman from SE Ohio. He knew how to connect with that important corner of the state. 2018, Rich Cordray had success and name recognition as the former Treasurer and Attorney General in Ohio until 2010. Whaley may be a rising star, but I would not characterize her as a superstar (she is not overly charismatic from my prior meetings with her a long time ago) so her rise is going to be slower and more deliberate.

If Whaley loses by single digits, that will be a big win for her this year and she would likely remain viable for future statewide office consideration.

we were downtown in OTR on Saturday afternoon. We normally do not get down much now but had a football game over at Stargall. I was impressed how lively and active the OTR neighborhood is during the day especially when an event like Oktoberfest is going on only a mile away. IN the past this would suck all the energy from the area but to see such a vibrant area with city flea and the street activity on Vine was quite impressive.

Whaley is underfunded and cannot afford the huge media blitz. Tim Ryan has a huuuuge war chest. Whaley will win the cities, women, and college educated voters. However, Whaley is not well known in places like Youngtown, Wooster, Mansfield, Stuebenville, Eastern Ohio, etc. She is unknown in these areas and her problem is that she is really not trying in these areas. Back when Obama ran and won, he made the point that he was going to all the rural places to try and campaign there. He was not doing that to win in those areas, he was doing that to try and minimize his losses.

If the matchup were Whaley vs JD Vance, I think you would be hearing a lot more about the governor race and the polling would look a lot different. For Whaley, it is almost be careful what you wish for. Her star crested in the wrong year. If this were 2018 or 2026 she would have been in a much different position. IMO the person who may benefit the most from this would be John Cranley. He lost the Dem primary, but whomever won the primary was pretty much destined to lose in November. This could potentially allow him an opportunity to reemerge in 2026 to position himself as a moderate who can win in Ohio (when the circumstances are easier to win due to an open seat) and can try and paint Whaley's loss as simply her politics not playing in Ohio. While that may partially be the case, the timing and circumstances have a lot more to do with it than the candidate this year.

1) power of incumbency. 2) Dewine has a name and has been recognized in the state for over 30 years now. Whaley has made a name in niche circles but is still relatively unknown statewide 3) Dewine camp has a lot more money than Whaley coupled with the name recognition. 4) Dewine was fairly respected and a fairly popular governor in Ohio amongst all coalitions (even though many on the far right did not like him because of COVID) 5) Ohio is a red leaning state. You can be a Dem and win in Ohio but you have to run as a conservative Dem to appeal statewide (see Paul Ryan). Whaley is not running that type of campaign and is still catering to niche interests that is popular amongst the progressive or more liberal leaning dem base but does not play well statewide. I think it is better to contrast the governor race with the Senate race and it paints a much clearer picture on what is going on 1) Governor race - Popular incumbent with statewide name recognition vs relatively unknown challenger vs Senate you have an open seat with seat with a slightly better known Democrat vs an upstart challenger who is running a poor race 2) Gov race - The big money players are not playing on the Dem side because they see the odds stacked against them (see #1) vs the Senate race is a much more attainable race (open seat vs incumbent) 3) Gov race - challenger is not well recognized and is also not as good of a campaigner. She ran for mayor of a small city 2-3 times but otherwise has not held public office. In the Senate race, Ryan has been there for a while, he is a much more experienced campaigner. 4) Gov Race - Whaley has not moved to the right to embrace the conservative tilt in Ohio politics and is running as an urban city candidate. That does not win statewide. Ryan, from Eastern Ohio understands where the race will be run and how to appeal to the voters in those areas. He is running to capture the rural, white voter in Eastern Ohio. Now he will not win those voters, but his goal is to create a split that allows him to win elsewhere.