cramer

Do they think you are Nick Spencer?

Yes, I presume we're all familiar with Dr Henry Higginbotham's seminal Equine Micturition in Industrial Application, 1911. Actually, pregnant mare's urine is used in hormone replacement therapy for menopausal women, like the creatively named premarin.

Horse piss is a completely different ballgame, you know, molecularly speaking.

^Very good point. It seems to me that Uptown Consortium still needs to be convinced of the project's value.

I'm surprised by a unanimous vote as well. I suppose they saw the writing on the wall. But it makes no sense for Cranley to hammer the financing plan, only to turn around and vote for it. Ahh, politics.

I had to leave the meeting early, Qualls proposed breaking up the motion into several smaller pieces. My feeling is that she wants to be able to say she voted for the streetcar in some capacity, as her supporters are putting some pressure on her to get in line.

Bortz makes the salient point that uptown and downtown support the rest of the city. Qualls is smiling throughout his comments. Crankey rebuts Bortz's rebuttal. Cranley talking about all the bug, bold things. Believes people would rather see Banks and riverfront.

Qualls talking again. Praised Crowley for being an extreme voice of reason, which is a difficult trick. Qualls says she is operating under a presumption that there is no going back. Crankey says we are putting the Banks in jeopardy by using the riverfront TIF. This guy wants an ESPN Zone in the worst way. Also against using captial funding from taxpayers in Mt Washington, Roselawn etc to benefit a few downtown. Yeah, that's not how the budget works. Bortz contests every point. Specifically, the riverfront TIF has never been earmarked for Banks.

Crowley states that motion is better than previous. Much more work to be done. This is bit an ordinance, just a motion. Just giving a direction, and commits council to following that direction. Today's vote keeps us moving. To paraphrase a contemporary of Crowley: this is the end of the beginning.

Bortz introduces the motion, giving props to admin and mayor for getting us here. Crowley thanks Bortz for speaking loudly. Fact: Crowley has Werthers in his right jacket pocket.

Thomas gives props to administration and council. He's a uniter. Ghiz has questions. Is it true that there's no turning back? No. Will the project definitely happen? No. If we get more private money, does the city put in less? Dunno. No more questions for admin. Some guy named Tarbell is up. Looks like a nutter. Bet he goes over time. Claims in 1880s, city was most dense city in W Hemisphere besides Lima, Peru. Who said nutter? By the way, they just turned off the time beeper thing. Lots of claps.

I think Bortz just compared the Banks to the effects of pigeon wings on NYC weather as part of a little summation. Despite this, he gets applause. Qualms said interpretating. Qualls cautioning that this motion sets the project in motion, for realsies. Dohoney says that unless they can't get the money, it is on.

Question about alternatives downtown, and whether they could have better remediated utility relocation. Short answer: no. Long answer, longer. Meetings with companies would be done within the year. Bortz up now. Asks an open ended question about the intent of the motion in the opinion of Dohoney. Dohoney reads as an authorization to go forward to implement, but does not have the entire project charted. Bortz clarifies: we don't have all the money right now, this allows the manager to go get it. "Now is a chance to be bold."

My phone wants to spell Qualls as Qualms and Cranley as Crankey. So that's why they call em smart phones. (I'll be here all week; try the veal.)

Uptown connector adds about $35 mil. Qualls just said Cranley's questions were excruciating. The audience thought that was funnier than Cranley did. Dohoney states that they will try to cover 35 m without city funds.

Qualls is up. Wants clarification on next steps. How does the admin work plan change because of the uptown connection? In other words, how have I made this more difficult? Dohoney: a tall order just got taller. Had envisioned using downtown circulator to use as match. Old plan gave uptown partners more time to get ready to be partners, and complicates getting federal participation.

Cranley has moved through capital budget and is now on to TIF funding. He's concerned that we are maxing out the riverfront TIF. And now asking about the Banks and riverfront park. There's grumbling in the pews from city staff that he already has this info.

While Cranley continues to dictate terms of negotiation in a public meeting, let's have a look at the other members. Bortz has his hand to his forehead, and a smirk that tells me he saw this coming. Dohoney has had enough of Cranley's silliness. Crankey is making up things, and Dohoney called him on it.

Cranley keeps hitting the potential Duke contribution pretty hard. Asking about hypothetical negotiation scenarios, esp guaranteed payments for electric use. Dohoney refuses to be drawn in to give away the strategy before the negotiation begins. Still, Cranley is doing a decent job poking holes -- it is, after all, his speciality.

Live from room 300, things are underway here after a delayed start. Even though this looks like a fait accompli, Cranley wants to take the opportunity to take each paragraph of the motion in turn and question the Manager and Mr Moore. Cranley hopes to emphasize the remaining funding concerns especially, and cautions that this motion puts the city on the hook for $61 mil. He's now moved on to questioning the private sources and public-private partnerships.

So, in light of this new motion, will the Finance Committee still take up the existing competing motions on today's agenda?

He was CityBeat's person of the year not long ago... shouldn't be too hard to find that article. He's a hard working, good dude.

^I think I saw those same guys around 7, playing cornhole. That pleased me greatly.

could you elaborate on what you meant by the above statement? Vegas has been able to grow, in population terms and therefore in the public imagination, based on a rather unique set of circumstances. When those circumstances are no longer prevalent, it will suffer to the same degree that it has prospered. Diminishing resources are a bitch. The "reinvention" of Vegas has really only been in terms of marketing. Dealing with expensive water and oil will take more than a legacy of glitz.

I really don't think that Vegas will be "Vegas" in a few decades.