We could see Cranley and Black cuffed by the FBI and slapped with federal charges over this:

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-27067615

 

Wrong article?  That links to an article about ties between crime rate and the removal of lead from gasoline...

 

Whoops.  I meant to link to the Business Courier article from late Friday regarding Cranley's attempt to force out Chief Blackwell. 

 

 

Please elaborate

 

Rumors of an FBI investigation of Cranley/Black have been circulating for months.

 

Is there anything substantial to these rumors? What kind of investigation?

Rumors are beginning to swirl that the Mayor is upset with City Manager Black. Apparently Mr. Black has a mind of his own.

I would say City Manager Black having a mind of his own isn't necessarily a bad thing.  It seems he understands how a big city works coming from Baltimore, so good to have a different perspective.  Not sure about how this whole Police Chief deal is going down, but it is what it is.  As in most cases, they know more than we do. 

Rumors are beginning to swirl that the Mayor is upset with City Manager Black. Apparently Mr. Black has a mind of his own.

 

Isn't this basically how Cranley feels about most people in government? Unless you do exactly as he says, he doesn't tend to like you.

Rumors are beginning to swirl that the Mayor is upset with City Manager Black. Apparently Mr. Black has a mind of his own.

 

Isn't this basically how Cranley feels about most people in government? Unless you do exactly as he says, he doesn't tend to like you.

 

Yes.  He's building a political machine, and he's fooled the tea partiers into cheering it on. 

 

Rumors are beginning to swirl that the Mayor is upset with City Manager Black. Apparently Mr. Black has a mind of his own.

 

Isn't this basically how Cranley feels about most people in government? Unless you do exactly as he says, he doesn't tend to like you.

 

Yes.  He's building a political machine, and he's fooled the tea partiers into cheering it on. 

 

 

The awful thing about this is that its an anti-urbanist political machine.  At least here in Chicago the policies are incredibly pro-urban even if the politics behind it sucks.

 

His anti-urbanism will be his downfall, he can't 100% fake it with support of redbike or by appearing on the Urbanophile.

The awful thing about this is that its an anti-urbanist political machine.  At least here in Chicago the policies are incredibly pro-urban even if the politics behind it sucks.

 

His anti-urbanism will be his downfall, he can't 100% fake it with support of redbike or by appearing on the Urbanophile.

 

Come on.  The Chicago Machine is pro-urban?  Police black sites? (Yes, I know it was the 90's, but it was still Daley Jr., the previous mayor).  Incredibly terrible finances?  Closing down tons of schools?  I think Chicago is one of the worst run cities in the country, and that doesn't help urbanism.

 

Cranley isn't starting a "machine".  Or, if there's any "machine" quality to him, it's that he represents a return to the Lukens.  But Cranley always adds his own petty fights to anything he touches in a way Charlie never did (though Tom obviously did, and I'm too young to remember James).  John represents a full-throated endorsement of real estate developer focused politics.  That's exactly the Daley/Rahm type of politics that exists in Chicago.

Come on.  The Chicago Machine is pro-urban?  Police black sites? (Yes, I know it was the 90's, but it was still Daley Jr., the previous mayor).  Incredibly terrible finances?  Closing down tons of schools?  I think Chicago is one of the worst run cities in the country, and that doesn't help urbanism.

 

Miles and miles of bike lanes (including protected bike lanes), big projects that are embraced by the community. TOD transit centers being built all over the place.  Valuing the city as a city.  Transit is taken for granted and is valued as an asset.  Those have been my observations.  Early adoption of good ideas without petty fights and people who as a norm take pride in their city.  Permitting system needs work and the city could be more democratic in nature (this is changing last mayor election gave me hope).  Finances are a bloody mess I'll give it that.

 

There is tons of stuff though that Cincinnatians can't wrap their heads around that we get - Urban groceries, having our hippest neighborhood resturants being open on Sunday for food, advertising to tourists, boasting about uniqueness of our city, comparing ourselves to other cities around the world and recognizing that a world exists outside of our outerbelt.  If Cincinnatians ever do that as a whole and stop electing dipsh*ts like Cranley then I'll concede that its a better run city (and you guys are closer to that than I've ever seen).  Keep in mind too that Chicago is a tale of two cities and I'm fortunate enough to live in the good one - it doesn't make it right, but that's how it is.

^Totally agree that there have been signature projects such as the ones you describe.  I just think that urbanism needs to be defined above all by how its principles serve the people in a city, and I think Chicago actually falls far short (and the worst & most suburban thing about it, purposefully so) in providing the same type of urban value to all of its residents.

 

Cranley isn't an evil genius.  He actually isn't that smart or compelling, when you think about how he was able to get David Mann to almost wreck the streetcar project in December of 2013, and now he seems to be a huge supporter (and is weirdly lauded by Streetcar supporters despite costing the City a million dollars and not being a political newbie such as Kevin Flynn).  He just learned from Tom Luken and his experience in 2001 that you can be successful (which translates as not lose your election) if you are willing to fall back on people's baser instincts.  Qualls ran a terrible campaign and basically sabotaged herself (and the streetcar project she became so identified with) when she helped delay construction by insisting on 1b.  This thing is going to be wildly successful and popular.  The croakers will still sound loud because the media provides them an echo chamber.

 

You want to avoid hack politicians like Cranley?  Then stop voting for additional strong mayor powers.  Guys like him win executive offices like the mayoralty because they rely on the hard core wankers who show up to vote in every election and then the slide into office with a resounding mandate given to them by just over half of 28% of the eligible voters.  I mean, think how crazy it was that that guy got defeated on his signature issue within a month after winning election.  It's because he never had broad-based support to begin with.

^Totally agree that there have been signature projects such as the ones you describe.  I just think that urbanism needs to be defined above all by how its principles serve the people in a city, and I think Chicago actually falls far short (and the worst & most suburban thing about it, purposefully so) in providing the same type of urban value to all of its residents.

 

Cranley isn't an evil genius.  He actually isn't that smart or compelling, when you think about how he was able to get David Mann to almost wreck the streetcar project in December of 2013, and now he seems to be a huge supporter (and is weirdly lauded by Streetcar supporters despite costing the City a million dollars and not being a political newbie such as Kevin Flynn).  He just learned from Tom Luken and his experience in 2001 that you can be successful (which translates as not lose your election) if you are willing to fall back on people's baser instincts.  Qualls ran a terrible campaign and basically sabotaged herself (and the streetcar project she became so identified with) when she helped delay construction by insisting on 1b.  This thing is going to be wildly successful and popular.  The croakers will still sound loud because the media provides them an echo chamber.

 

You want to avoid hack politicians like Cranley?  Then stop voting for additional strong mayor powers.  Guys like him win executive offices like the mayoralty because they rely on the hard core wankers who show up to vote in every election and then the slide into office with a resounding mandate given to them by just over half of 28% of the eligible voters.  I mean, think how crazy it was that that guy got defeated on his signature issue within a month after winning election.  It's because he never had broad-based support to begin with.

 

 

Cranely isn't a genius, he just knew how to build a coalition and advertise to that coalition.  The Enquirer being the rag that it is endorsed him, as did other key stakeholders.  Why they supported him baffles me, but I just view it as a symptom of a culturally ill city that doesn't fully understand that the Mallory years were good medicine.

I don't think people will understand how good the Mallory years were for Cincinnati until 25 years from now when we see the full vision realized. Cincyopolis had a great post on this topic the other day. David Pepper was the guy who was "supposed" to win the election. Pepper had all the corporate backing and was the guy that the Enquirer understood. Mallory winning was a fluke in the system, and resulted in us actually having a mayor who was interested in redeveloping the urban core, improving transit, and increasing our city's population rather than just doing what the Fortune 500 companies wanted him to do. The Enquirer never understood Mallory and never celebrated his accomplishments.

I think you all sell Cranley short here solely because of his stance on the Streetcar. Cranley is doing a much better job than Mallory did, not to say Mallory was not the right fit at the time, but that it was also good Cranley is in charge. Cranley has the support of the business community and is able to get a lot more things done. The complaint I heard on Mallory was that him and Doheny often got in the way with some stupid initiatives, etc... Mallory would talk a big game and was  a good cheerleader but he and his crew were often fiscally irresponsible with the city money (see Mohagoney's, streetcar structure, responsible bidder). Mallory and his cronies were too enamored by the shiny new object and would not really understand what it take to bring it to fruition.

 

Don't you think that having a real estate attorney who is also a developer himself, and has developed multi-million dollar projects, represented other developers in this arena and understands how to secure the financing and collateral to make the project happen would be an asset? Yes, Mallory got phase I of the banks off, but the project has really taken off under Cranley, because he was able to shore up financing and make the numbers work. GE is coming to the Banks (and if you want to give Mallory credit for the Banks, then Cranley deserves credit for GE). 

 

I lived in Cleveland in the 1990s when Mike White was mayor. He was similar to Mallory and Cleveland was experiencing a rebirth at that time, but the city coffers were in horrible shape. When he left office, the city struggled for a few years before trying to find its footing again. Bottom line, there was a mess with finances that were being papered over before Cranley took over and he has straightened them out to allow the city to move forward. 

I think you all sell Cranley short here solely because of his stance on the Streetcar. Cranley is doing a much better job than Mallory did, not to say Mallory was not the right fit at the time, but that it was also good Cranley is in charge. Cranley has the support of the business community and is able to get a lot more things done. The complaint I heard on Mallory was that him and Doheny often got in the way with some stupid initiatives, etc... Mallory would talk a big game and was  a good cheerleader but he and his crew were often fiscally irresponsible with the city money (see Mohagoney's, streetcar structure, responsible bidder). Mallory and his cronies were too enamored by the shiny new object and would not really understand what it take to bring it to fruition.

 

Don't you think that having a real estate attorney who is also a developer himself, and has developed multi-million dollar projects, represented other developers in this arena and understands how to secure the financing and collateral to make the project happen would be an asset? Yes, Mallory got phase I of the banks off, but the project has really taken off under Cranley, because he was able to shore up financing and make the numbers work. GE is coming to the Banks (and if you want to give Mallory credit for the Banks, then Cranley deserves credit for GE). 

 

I lived in Cleveland in the 1990s when Mike White was mayor. He was similar to Mallory and Cleveland was experiencing a rebirth at that time, but the city coffers were in horrible shape. When he left office, the city struggled for a few years before trying to find its footing again. Bottom line, there was a mess with finances that were being papered over before Cranley took over and he has straightened them out to allow the city to move forward. 

 

You are wrong.  The city was completely crippled by an inane inability to get anything done on anything in the last years of Luken.  The banks were a hole, OTR was still crumbling (I have a feeling it was Mallory's leadership that allowed 3CDC to go to OTR and  not the banks), there was still a hostile relationship between the black community and the police.  Also, the police were NOT doing their job.  Cincinnati was a miserable smoldering pile of a city back in 2006, you are in denial if you feel otherwise.  Most of the cities problems came down to people having petty fights about petty junk, and Luken's admin encouraged it.  Cranley is a return to that, difference is now enough people KNOW that something different is possible and there is WAY more pushback than it was.  Cincinnati was literally just taking the junk it was handed and not doing anything to fight for having a better city.  Frankly my opinion was that Cincy itself was well on the path to being completely and utterly hollowed out frankly due to ZERO leadership from the establishment who was all too comfortable with things being beyond broken.

 

To put things into perspective (I know this is a long article) read this report from the Atlantic regarding how a change in leadership ultimately improved community police relations (it also led to the banks being developed and pretty much every other "futuristic" idea from being actually implimented in Cincinnati.  Pepper WOULD NOT have moved things foward).

 

Here's the article: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/05/cincinnati-police-reform/393797/

 

(Nice when you get a non rag of a paper doing deep investigative journalism isn't it?)

 

Finally most of what Mallory did was get the city back on track to where tax revenues would be up due to investments.  That did have an impact as evidenced by the surplus Cranley foolishly spent on police that he received this year.  Investments were the name of the game here, not foolish spending other than a few things like Mahoganys.

 

Also Cranley DIDN"T KNOW ABOUT GE initially, it was negotiated by other parties.  Read the paper.

^Totally innappropriate.

I cleaned it up a bit.  The opinions stand.  Cincy was a hole, Mallory performed a miracle.

Saying Cranley has been moving things along during his term is frankly disingenuous. I think we all know that. But to say that Luken had a failed tenure is not true either. He is a smart man and he did understand that the city would redevelop from the inside out, beginning with downtown and OTR. 3CDC was born under his tenure, and the police collaborative agreement after the riots.

 

Saying Cranley has been moving things along during his term is frankly disingenuous. I think we all know that. But to say that Luken had a failed tenure is not true either. He is a smart man and he did understand that the city would redevelop from the inside out, beginning with downtown and OTR. 3CDC was born under his tenure, and the police collaborative agreement after the riots.

 

 

If Luken had his way the Banks would have been done by 3CDC and OTR would have been a long term goal - at which point more of the neighborhood would have been lost.  I give Luken credit for one thing and one thing only, starting 3CDC, which is IMO exactly the sort of organization I felt would get Cincinnati out of its hole, if directed right - an org that took advantage of the large business community.  Thing is there needed to be pushback on their plan, and Cincy wound up with something better due to that happening.

 

Also in regards to the Police agreement, read the article in the Atlantic, Luken felt that the feds needed to leave even when there was way more work to be done.  He was not helping things.

So its only your opinion that waiting 15 years for the Banks to be completed is better for the city?

So its only your opinion that waiting 15 years for the Banks to be completed is better for the city?

 

I don't know the history of who set the priorites for 3CDC but OTR as it existed in 2001 was a threat to downtown's survival.  If nothing had changed I think Kroger, Macy's and maybe eventually P&G would have departed for the suburbs or elsewhere.  Plus any delay in revitalizing OTR would have resulted in historic building stock deteriorating past the point of no return. 

So its only your opinion that waiting 15 years for the Banks to be completed is better for the city?

 

The banks would have taken a long time to complete either way, probably longer if there wasn't leadership that valued compromise and professionalism like Mallory did.  Remember that the whole stadium agreement was completely and utterly dorked up and required the co-operation of a lot of different parties with competiting interest.  The old Cincinnati way was to whip up an argument over every little detail to the point where people were just yelling and screaming at each other, the city needed leadership that was more mature than that pettiness and was willing to get things done.

 

Think bigger picture too - what's a better asset to the city from a big picture perspective?  A one of a kind neighborhood with a history that rivals that of many a tourist destinations and frankly is the ONLY neighborhood like it in the whole Midwest or a new neighborhood between two stadiums.  Both are important, one would be key to the success of Cincinnati as a region, Cincinnati WAY undersells its historic and architectural assets - and OTR is a neighborhood that could if marketed correctly put Cincinnati into the national consciousness.  Right now people look at Cincy from outside Cincy as a typical boring Midwestern city, a fully revitalized OTR is the opposite of that.  I guess its because I grew up just outside of Dayton and have been traveling since I was a young kid that I see the potential when a lot of people in Cincinnati are incapable of understanding it.  Even before I dove deep into the history of Cincinnati I knew something was different about it - looking at the buildings pretty much told me that as no other city around it has buildings like Cincy does.

Mallory had vision.  Maybe it was a bit sloppy at times, but he saw the big picture.  He proposed the streetcar, probabably the most exciting urban development in the Cincinnati Region since...?

 

He proposed a bridge to the West Side over the Ohio River, he got the Banks started, pushed hard on core re-development.

 

John Cranley proposed a beer garden in Mt. Airy.

 

Now, he also got things done like the pension fix which is huge for the city, but he doesn't really have the vision you need in an exciting city and he most definitely is a hater on multi purpose roadways and rail transit, he consistently pits the urban core against neighborhoods, while neighborhoods see spikes in crime, etc.  I think he does a good job on a lot of things but some of the things he does and says makes people who care about the urban core shake with anger.  That is his downfall.

Didn't Cranley basically just let the courts decide how to fix the pension and he agreed to follow its ruling?

Didn't Cranley basically just let the courts decide how to fix the pension and he agreed to follow its ruling?

 

Cranley's idea was to get all of the parties to agree to let a federal judge mediate and enforce and agreement on how to fix the pension. It was an innovative idea and frankly the best thing he's done as Mayor and will likely be his lasting legacy. It's a great thing for the city.

 

Unfortunately PAlexendar and neilworms are right about everything else in regards to this mayor.

Mallory had vision.  Maybe it was a bit sloppy at times, but he saw the big picture.  He proposed the streetcar, probabably the most exciting urban development in the Cincinnati Region since...?

 

He proposed a bridge to the West Side over the Ohio River, he got the Banks started, pushed hard on core re-development.

 

John Cranley proposed a beer garden in Mt. Airy.

 

Now, he also got things done like the pension fix which is huge for the city, but he doesn't really have the vision you need in an exciting city and he most definitely is a hater on multi purpose roadways and rail transit, he consistently pits the urban core against neighborhoods, while neighborhoods see spikes in crime, etc.  I think he does a good job on a lot of things but some of the things he does and says makes people who care about the urban core shake with anger.  That is his downfall.

 

I will give you Mallory was more of the vision person but he did not know how to get things done in a safe manner that protected the integrity of city finances. Often times, he was scattered and was difficult to work with per many influential business leaders. This cost the city a number of significant opportunities during his tenure. That being said, in 2007 he was what the city needed, he was a shot in the arm and #1 cheerleader. By 2014 though, we did not need him and a third term would have taken the city backwards.

 

Cranley is less visionary but he understands the finances and mechanics to get things done. He knows how to work the inner workings of the system. He has the contacts and trust in the business community, and he has the experience as a developer to know what is feasible and what is not economically feasible. It may mean we have to dial back on the shiny objects but it will mean that more things actually go from vision to fruition.

 

 

Don't you think that having a real estate attorney who is also a developer himself, and has developed multi-million dollar projects, represented other developers in this arena and understands how to secure the financing and collateral to make the project happen would be an asset?

 

Cranley is less visionary but he understands the finances and mechanics to get things done. He knows how to work the inner workings of the system. He has the contacts and trust in the business community, and he has the experience as a developer to know what is feasible and what is not economically feasible. It may mean we have to dial back on the shiny objects but it will mean that more things actually go from vision to fruition.

 

The Mayor need not be a development expert to help folks secure financing and collateral to make projects happen. That's what why hire an Economic Development Director and Solicitor Office lawyers. The Mayor needs to be an advocate for the city. The whole city.

Mallory had vision.  Maybe it was a bit sloppy at times, but he saw the big picture.  He proposed the streetcar, probabably the most exciting urban development in the Cincinnati Region since...?

 

He proposed a bridge to the West Side over the Ohio River, he got the Banks started, pushed hard on core re-development.

 

John Cranley proposed a beer garden in Mt. Airy.

 

Now, he also got things done like the pension fix which is huge for the city, but he doesn't really have the vision you need in an exciting city and he most definitely is a hater on multi purpose roadways and rail transit, he consistently pits the urban core against neighborhoods, while neighborhoods see spikes in crime, etc.  I think he does a good job on a lot of things but some of the things he does and says makes people who care about the urban core shake with anger.  That is his downfall.

 

I will give you Mallory was more of the vision person but he did not know how to get things done in a safe manner that protected the integrity of city finances. Often times, he was scattered and was difficult to work with per many influential business leaders. This cost the city a number of significant opportunities during his tenure. That being said, in 2007 he was what the city needed, he was a shot in the arm and #1 cheerleader. By 2014 though, we did not need him and a third term would have taken the city backwards.

 

Cranley is less visionary but he understands the finances and mechanics to get things done. He knows how to work the inner workings of the system. He has the contacts and trust in the business community, and he has the experience as a developer to know what is feasible and what is not economically feasible. It may mean we have to dial back on the shiny objects but it will mean that more things actually go from vision to fruition.

 

 

 

The city needed one more term of Mallory to get the city to a superstar status.  The finances could have been cleaned up once the city was there (and the city would have been in a MUCH better position to do so when it was there due to increased tax revenue from investment and tourism).

 

  You do realize Cincinnati was on the verge of getting some unbelievable national press?  Cranley set the city back 5 years IMO.  (After he set the city back 10 due to his poor handling of the public safety meeting which led to the riots).  You give him way too much credit.  Cincy would have been focusing on stage 2 of the streetcar instead of some dumb bridge to Cincinnati State that costs just as much, focused on form based code to better revitalize neighborhoods and play to the assets that Cincy already has (its historic housing stock hopefully prevent more U-Squares), focused on improving bicycle infrastructure, a proper urban grocery that would have scared Kroger into actually being competitive in the core, as well as continued neighborhood investment with an urban instead of suburban bent.  Wasson way could very well ruin the possibility of light rail on an excellent corridor, the MLK interchange is totally an old school way of thinking of economic development - one that is awkwardly trying to put walkable neighborhoods on top of a fundamentally auto oriented development and finally Liberty Street which is way underutilized would have been turned into the urban corridor that it deserves to be - its my understanding that was cranceled as well.

 

Don't get me started on the pump house either, yes it was a croney move, but the resulting benefit would be yet another one of those underutilized amazing buildings in Cincinnati of which there way too many of ACTUALLY being put to good use!  Things like the pump house are a boon to tourism, because frankly Cincinnati until OTR started turning around was a city of look at those pretty but crumbling buildings, yet there is pretty much nothing else of value there - a city that's fun to look at, but not fun to play in and was (and still is to a strong degree) unfriendly to outsiders.

 

Had Cranley gotten what he wanted with the streetcar he could have set the city back to square one on a whole lot of stuff and that would have been incredibly reckless to finances as well as the ability for the city to get anything done with the feds help.

Mallory had vision.  Maybe it was a bit sloppy at times, but he saw the big picture.  He proposed the streetcar, probabably the most exciting urban development in the Cincinnati Region since...?

 

He proposed a bridge to the West Side over the Ohio River, he got the Banks started, pushed hard on core re-development.

 

John Cranley proposed a beer garden in Mt. Airy.

 

Now, he also got things done like the pension fix which is huge for the city, but he doesn't really have the vision you need in an exciting city and he most definitely is a hater on multi purpose roadways and rail transit, he consistently pits the urban core against neighborhoods, while neighborhoods see spikes in crime, etc.  I think he does a good job on a lot of things but some of the things he does and says makes people who care about the urban core shake with anger.  That is his downfall.

 

I will give you Mallory was more of the vision person but he did not know how to get things done in a safe manner that protected the integrity of city finances. Often times, he was scattered and was difficult to work with per many influential business leaders. This cost the city a number of significant opportunities during his tenure. That being said, in 2007 he was what the city needed, he was a shot in the arm and #1 cheerleader. By 2014 though, we did not need him and a third term would have taken the city backwards.

 

Cranley is less visionary but he understands the finances and mechanics to get things done. He knows how to work the inner workings of the system. He has the contacts and trust in the business community, and he has the experience as a developer to know what is feasible and what is not economically feasible. It may mean we have to dial back on the shiny objects but it will mean that more things actually go from vision to fruition.

 

 

 

The city needed one more term of Mallory to get the city to a superstar status.  The finances could have been cleaned up once the city was there (and the city would have been in a MUCH better position to do so when it was there due to increased tax revenue from investment and tourism).

 

  You do realize Cincinnati was on the verge of getting some unbelievable national press?  Cranley set the city back 5 years IMO.  (After he set the city back 10 due to his poor handling of the public safety meeting which led to the riots).  You give him way too much credit.  Cincy would have been focusing on stage 2 of the streetcar instead of some dumb bridge to Cincinnati State that costs just as much, focused on form based code to better revitalize neighborhoods and play to the assets that Cincy already has (its historic housing stock hopefully prevent more U-Squares), focused on improving bicycle infrastructure, a proper urban grocery that would have scared Kroger into actually being competitive in the core, as well as continued neighborhood investment with an urban instead of suburban bent.  Wasson way could very well ruin the possibility of light rail on an excellent corridor, the MLK interchange is totally an old school way of thinking of economic development - one that is awkwardly trying to put walkable neighborhoods on top of a fundamentally auto oriented development and finally Liberty Street which is way underutalized would have been turned into the urban corridor that it deserves to be - its my understanding that was cranceled as well.  (Don't get me started on the pump house either, yes it was a croney move, but the resulting benefit would be yet another one of those underutalized amazing buildings in Cincinnati of which there way too many of ACTUALLY being put to good use!)

 

I tend to agree with this more than anything.  It seemed like so much more was happening in terms of development and announcements, etc.  Maybe I am wrong and that is just my perception, but it seems like things are moving slower development wise and I am not certain if that is the Mayoral change or not.  The Cincinnati State bridge seems like a complete waste of money.  The city would do better to put that money into it's urban core because that is the future of the region.  I always felt that if the city could re-develop the whole urban core up to UC, that it would be a huge boon because of transit options and because young people want to live in a city.  No other city in the MidWest besides Chi-Town has that old school Chicago / New York type urban fabric that Cincinnati has in Over the Rhine / Downtown / Mt. Auburn up to Corryville / CUF / Walnut Hills.  Pouring more money into that area as investments is the best thing the city could spend it's money on, whether it is the streetcar, street makeovers, more funding in the development pot, etc.  This is a turnover effect that thankfully is already starting to pay off.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think that the Incline Public House and possibly even the new theatre up there could be a decent investment, just because it will bring West Side people into the city who maybe wouldn't go otherwise, but the matter of fact is that people want to live in an exciting urban environment, employers are increasingly looking to locate where people want to live, and Cincinnati has the goods to make it happen in the urban core.  Pitting the center city against the neighborhoods is just bad policy, period.  Look at what all the investments have done so far, as revenues have increased consistently over the last 1.5 years.

Mallory had vision.  Maybe it was a bit sloppy at times, but he saw the big picture.  He proposed the streetcar, probabably the most exciting urban development in the Cincinnati Region since...?

 

He proposed a bridge to the West Side over the Ohio River, he got the Banks started, pushed hard on core re-development.

 

John Cranley proposed a beer garden in Mt. Airy.

 

Now, he also got things done like the pension fix which is huge for the city, but he doesn't really have the vision you need in an exciting city and he most definitely is a hater on multi purpose roadways and rail transit, he consistently pits the urban core against neighborhoods, while neighborhoods see spikes in crime, etc.  I think he does a good job on a lot of things but some of the things he does and says makes people who care about the urban core shake with anger.  That is his downfall.

 

I will give you Mallory was more of the vision person but he did not know how to get things done in a safe manner that protected the integrity of city finances. Often times, he was scattered and was difficult to work with per many influential business leaders. This cost the city a number of significant opportunities during his tenure. That being said, in 2007 he was what the city needed, he was a shot in the arm and #1 cheerleader. By 2014 though, we did not need him and a third term would have taken the city backwards.

 

Cranley is less visionary but he understands the finances and mechanics to get things done. He knows how to work the inner workings of the system. He has the contacts and trust in the business community, and he has the experience as a developer to know what is feasible and what is not economically feasible. It may mean we have to dial back on the shiny objects but it will mean that more things actually go from vision to fruition.

 

 

 

The city needed one more term of Mallory to get the city to a superstar status.  The finances could have been cleaned up once the city was there (and the city would have been in a MUCH better position to do so when it was there due to increased tax revenue from investment and tourism).

 

  You do realize Cincinnati was on the verge of getting some unbelievable national press?  Cranley set the city back 5 years IMO.  (After he set the city back 10 due to his poor handling of the public safety meeting which led to the riots).  You give him way too much credit.  Cincy would have been focusing on stage 2 of the streetcar instead of some dumb bridge to Cincinnati State that costs just as much, focused on form based code to better revitalize neighborhoods and play to the assets that Cincy already has (its historic housing stock hopefully prevent more U-Squares), focused on improving bicycle infrastructure, a proper urban grocery that would have scared Kroger into actually being competitive in the core, as well as continued neighborhood investment with an urban instead of suburban bent.  Wasson way could very well ruin the possibility of light rail on an excellent corridor, the MLK interchange is totally an old school way of thinking of economic development - one that is awkwardly trying to put walkable neighborhoods on top of a fundamentally auto oriented development and finally Liberty Street which is way underutalized would have been turned into the urban corridor that it deserves to be - its my understanding that was cranceled as well.  (Don't get me started on the pump house either, yes it was a croney move, but the resulting benefit would be yet another one of those underutalized amazing buildings in Cincinnati of which there way too many of ACTUALLY being put to good use!)

 

I tend to agree with this more than anything.  It seemed like so much more was happening in terms of development and announcements, etc.  Maybe I am wrong and that is just my perception, but it seems like things are moving slower development wise and I am not certain if that is the Mayoral change or not.  The Cincinnati State bridge seems like a complete waste of money.  The city would do better to put that money into it's urban core because that is the future of the region.  I always felt that if the city could re-develop the whole urban core up to UC, that it would be a huge boon because of transit options and because young people want to live in a city.  No other city in the MidWest besides Chi-Town has that old school Chicago / New York type urban fabric that Cincinnati has in Over the Rhine / Downtown / Mt. Auburn up to Corryville / CUF / Walnut Hills.  Pouring more money into that area as investments is the best thing the city could spend it's money on, whether it is the streetcar, street makeovers, more funding in the development pot, etc.  This is a turnover effect that thankfully is already starting to pay off.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think that the Incline Public House and possibly even the new theatre up there could be a decent investment, just because it will bring West Side people into the city who maybe wouldn't go otherwise, but the matter of fact is that people want to live in an exciting urban environment, employers are increasingly looking to locate where people want to live, and Cincinnati has the goods to make it happen in the urban core.  Pitting the center city against the neighborhoods is just bad policy, period.  Look at what all the investments have done so far, as revenues have increased consistently over the last 1.5 years.

 

I also get the feeling that Cranley will never be happy until much of this development receeds.  It wasn't his doing (or his buddies) and he's mad as hell that this happened.  I'm glad Mallory set so much into motion that I don't think Cranley will throw it all out of wack, though Cincinnati needs to watch him like a hawk.  Its part of why I'm glad things like UrbanCincy exist now and people like Ryan Messer exist just to do that.

Mallory had vision.  Maybe it was a bit sloppy at times, but he saw the big picture.  He proposed the streetcar, probabably the most exciting urban development in the Cincinnati Region since...?

 

He proposed a bridge to the West Side over the Ohio River, he got the Banks started, pushed hard on core re-development.

 

John Cranley proposed a beer garden in Mt. Airy.

 

Now, he also got things done like the pension fix which is huge for the city, but he doesn't really have the vision you need in an exciting city and he most definitely is a hater on multi purpose roadways and rail transit, he consistently pits the urban core against neighborhoods, while neighborhoods see spikes in crime, etc.  I think he does a good job on a lot of things but some of the things he does and says makes people who care about the urban core shake with anger.  That is his downfall.

 

I will give you Mallory was more of the vision person but he did not know how to get things done in a safe manner that protected the integrity of city finances. Often times, he was scattered and was difficult to work with per many influential business leaders. This cost the city a number of significant opportunities during his tenure. That being said, in 2007 he was what the city needed, he was a shot in the arm and #1 cheerleader. By 2014 though, we did not need him and a third term would have taken the city backwards.

 

Cranley is less visionary but he understands the finances and mechanics to get things done. He knows how to work the inner workings of the system. He has the contacts and trust in the business community, and he has the experience as a developer to know what is feasible and what is not economically feasible. It may mean we have to dial back on the shiny objects but it will mean that more things actually go from vision to fruition.

 

 

 

The city needed one more term of Mallory to get the city to a superstar status.  The finances could have been cleaned up once the city was there (and the city would have been in a MUCH better position to do so when it was there due to increased tax revenue from investment and tourism).

 

  You do realize Cincinnati was on the verge of getting some unbelievable national press?  Cranley set the city back 5 years IMO.  (After he set the city back 10 due to his poor handling of the public safety meeting which led to the riots).  You give him way too much credit.  Cincy would have been focusing on stage 2 of the streetcar instead of some dumb bridge to Cincinnati State that costs just as much, focused on form based code to better revitalize neighborhoods and play to the assets that Cincy already has (its historic housing stock hopefully prevent more U-Squares), focused on improving bicycle infrastructure, a proper urban grocery that would have scared Kroger into actually being competitive in the core, as well as continued neighborhood investment with an urban instead of suburban bent.  Wasson way could very well ruin the possibility of light rail on an excellent corridor, the MLK interchange is totally an old school way of thinking of economic development - one that is awkwardly trying to put walkable neighborhoods on top of a fundamentally auto oriented development and finally Liberty Street which is way underutalized would have been turned into the urban corridor that it deserves to be - its my understanding that was cranceled as well.  (Don't get me started on the pump house either, yes it was a croney move, but the resulting benefit would be yet another one of those underutalized amazing buildings in Cincinnati of which there way too many of ACTUALLY being put to good use!)

 

I tend to agree with this more than anything.  It seemed like so much more was happening in terms of development and announcements, etc.  Maybe I am wrong and that is just my perception, but it seems like things are moving slower development wise and I am not certain if that is the Mayoral change or not.  The Cincinnati State bridge seems like a complete waste of money.  The city would do better to put that money into it's urban core because that is the future of the region.  I always felt that if the city could re-develop the whole urban core up to UC, that it would be a huge boon because of transit options and because young people want to live in a city.  No other city in the MidWest besides Chi-Town has that old school Chicago / New York type urban fabric that Cincinnati has in Over the Rhine / Downtown / Mt. Auburn up to Corryville / CUF / Walnut Hills.  Pouring more money into that area as investments is the best thing the city could spend it's money on, whether it is the streetcar, street makeovers, more funding in the development pot, etc.  This is a turnover effect that thankfully is already starting to pay off.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think that the Incline Public House and possibly even the new theatre up there could be a decent investment, just because it will bring West Side people into the city who maybe wouldn't go otherwise, but the matter of fact is that people want to live in an exciting urban environment, employers are increasingly looking to locate where people want to live, and Cincinnati has the goods to make it happen in the urban core.  Pitting the center city against the neighborhoods is just bad policy, period.  Look at what all the investments have done so far, as revenues have increased consistently over the last 1.5 years.

 

I also get the feeling that Cranley will never be happy until much of this development receeds.  It wasn't his doing (or his buddies) and he's mad as hell that this happened.  I'm glad Mallory set so much into motion that I don't think Cranley will throw it all out of wack, though Cincinnati needs to watch him like a hawk.  Its part of why I'm glad things like UrbanCincy exist now and people like Ryan Messer exist just to do that.

 

I agree with you here. Cranley’s only concern has been ensuring his ideas are successful. He doesn’t care that the streetcar will be a huge step for the city, or that OTR is growing to be the most popular neighborhood in the city. Nor does he care that we have a sheriff who is successful and has reduced crime. My biggest concern isn’t what his ideas are, it’s that he’s willing to sacrifice other, already successful ideas in order to ensure his succeed. He’s already demonstrated this intent with the streetcar, the 4th and Race tower, etc. It’s really apparent to me that John Cranley is in this just for John Cranley, and not for Cincinnati. In fact, I think he’s demonstrated many qualities indicative of antisocial personality disorder.

So its only your opinion that waiting 15 years for the Banks to be completed is better for the city?

 

The banks would have taken a long time to complete either way, probably longer if there wasn't leadership that valued compromise and professionalism like Mallory did.  Remember that the whole stadium agreement was completely and utterly dorked up and required the co-operation of a lot of different parties with competiting interest.  The old Cincinnati way was to whip up an argument over every little detail to the point where people were just yelling and screaming at each other, the city needed leadership that was more mature than that pettiness and was willing to get things done.

 

Think bigger picture too - what's a better asset to the city from a big picture perspective?  A one of a kind neighborhood with a history that rivals that of many a tourist destinations and frankly is the ONLY neighborhood like it in the whole Midwest or a new neighborhood between two stadiums.  Both are important, one would be key to the success of Cincinnati as a region, Cincinnati WAY undersells its historic and architectural assets - and OTR is a neighborhood that could if marketed correctly put Cincinnati into the national consciousness.  Right now people look at Cincy from outside Cincy as a typical boring Midwestern city, a fully revitalized OTR is the opposite of that.  I guess its because I grew up just outside of Dayton and have been traveling since I was a young kid that I see the potential when a lot of people in Cincinnati are incapable of understanding it.  Even before I dove deep into the history of Cincinnati I knew something was different about it - looking at the buildings pretty much told me that as no other city around it has buildings like Cincy does.

 

I would also throw out there that it came to be realized in the early 2000s that sports stadiums, especially football stadiums, are not good economic anchors. They didn't fulfill their promise as magnets for jobs and housing, because that's not what stadiums do. I believe this is part of the paradigm shift in urban planning and real estate development in general that took place last decade; it's really the basics that redevelop neighborhoods: walkability, proximity to jobs, good historic fabric, targeted financial incentives, and investments in appropriately scaled infrastructure. It's not IMAX theaters, football stadiums, ferris wheels, etc. I think Mallory did have a bit of a "chase the cool things" streak, but he was chasing the right ones.

I agree with you here. Cranley’s only concern has been ensuring his ideas are successful. He doesn’t care that the streetcar will be a huge step for the city, or that OTR is growing to be the most popular neighborhood in the city. Nor does he care that we have a sheriff who is successful and has reduced crime. My biggest concern isn’t what his ideas are, it’s that he’s willing to sacrifice other, already successful ideas in order to ensure his succeed. He’s already demonstrated this intent with the streetcar, the 4th and Race tower, etc. It’s really apparent to me that John Cranley is in this just for John Cranley, and not for Cincinnati. In fact, I think he’s demonstrated many qualities indicative of antisocial personality disorder.

 

It's pretty clear that Cranley wants to burn down anything that the previous administration accomplished and doesn't have his name all over it. He is so clearly angry that the previous administration chose a police chief before he got into office, and now he wants to oust him so that he can put "his" guy in charge.

 

To me, there is no better example of this than the parking plan. Cranley warned us that previous administration's parking plan would have raised parking meter rates and hurt our neighborhoods. So he cancelled it as soon as he got into office. But then he borrowed money to pay for the installation of new smart meters, and raised rates -- but only in downtown and OTR, which, as we know, Cranley does not consider to be "neighborhoods".

If handled right, chasing after the right cool things makes your city a cooler city ;).  We all know Cincinnati is a cool city, but does the rest of the world know?  Is Cincinnati doing everything it can do to fulfill its deserved status?  My answer would be no on both counts.

 

I would also throw out there that it came to be realized in the early 2000s that sports stadiums, especially football stadiums, are not good economic anchors. They didn't fulfill their promise as magnets for jobs and housing, because that's not what stadiums do. I believe this is part of the paradigm shift in urban planning and real estate development in general that took place last decade; it's really the basics that redevelop neighborhoods: walkability, proximity to jobs, good historic fabric, targeted financial incentives, and investments in appropriately scaled infrastructure. It's not IMAX theaters, football stadiums, ferris wheels, etc. I think Mallory did have a bit of a "chase the cool things" streak, but he was chasing the right ones.

I will give you Mallory was more of the vision person but he did not know how to get things done in a safe manner that protected the integrity of city finances. Often times, he was scattered and was difficult to work with per many influential business leaders. This cost the city a number of significant opportunities during his tenure. That being said, in 2007 he was what the city needed, he was a shot in the arm and #1 cheerleader. By 2014 though, we did not need him and a third term would have taken the city backwards.

 

Cranley is less visionary but he understands the finances and mechanics to get things done. He knows how to work the inner workings of the system. He has the contacts and trust in the business community, and he has the experience as a developer to know what is feasible and what is not economically feasible. It may mean we have to dial back on the shiny objects but it will mean that more things actually go from vision to fruition.

 

First, Cranley was the head of the finance committee for basically Mallory's whole first term.  The chair of the finance committee sets the agenda for the budget.  They were allies during this time.  Read the papers.  Understand how the process actually works.

 

Second, remember all that "structurally balanced budget" malarkey?  Cranley's last budget wasn't structurally balanced.  The reason why you don't hear that term thrown about so much now is because it was always just a term that the conservatives used to ding the liberals on council.  The conservatives are in power now, so no one uses it as a way to ding them.

 

Third, Cincinnati had a riot in 2001 because of the terrible relationship between the black community and the police.  The collaborative agreement was signed in 2001-2002 but wasn't implemented until Mallory came into office.  Read that Atlantic story.  It's amazing.  The improved police-community relations is the best thing that has happened in the City in twenty or thirty years.

 

Fourth, Mallory's election in 2005 wasn't a fluke, it was a function of the issues that were present in the City at the time and the demographics.  Pepper (who's a pretty good politician) wanted to build a new jail as County Commissioner in 2007.  He had a pretty good plan.  Read the Atlantic article.  Turns out that by implementing the Collaborative Agreement & community oriented policing, the City was able to both reduce crime & arrests.  I guess we didn't need to spend millions on a new jail, no matter how sensible the plans were, we just need to treat citizens with equal respect.

 

Fifth, the Streetcar was the second best thing to come out of the Mallory/Dohoney administration.  It wasn't unique to them, they just realized it was both doable by the City as a City (and not in conjunction with the County a la MetroMoves or SORTA funding, always a dead end) and that it complemented what 3CDC was doing, as well as all the Findlay Market rehab that had already occured.  It's easier for the City to act as a residential real estate developer and attract people to move within its territory and have businesses follow (this is obviously what happened in the suburbs) than it is to try to entice business to move, because they'll just play the tax credit game (witness Omnicare).

 

Sixth, Cranley should be proud of the pension agreement.  That is a great thing for the City and something he worked hard to bring about.

 

Mallory may have been silly in many ways, but the achievements of the Mallory/Dohoney administration are objectively far more substantial than anything Cranley has so far done or proposed.  Attributing some sort of fiscal responsibility to him is ludicrous because it completely ignores the previous eight years he spend in politics, and who his allies were at that time.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but as I understand it, it's inaccurate to portray Cranley as a successful real estate developer.  Price Hill's Incline Village, of which he was a partner, struggled to succeed and we've never heard if he repaid about $75,000 he owed on a defaulted LISC loan associated with the project.  I think it was, and is, noble to try to help Price Hill realize its potential, but the fact remains that Cranley's track record as a developer isn't worth bragging about as far as I know.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but as I understand it, it's inaccurate to portray Cranley as a successful real estate developer.  Price Hill's Incline Village, of which he was a partner, struggled to succeed and we've never heard if he repaid about $75,000 he owed on a defaulted LISC loan associated with the project.  I think it was, and is, noble to try to help Price Hill realize its potential, but the fact remains that Cranley's track record as a developer isn't worth bragging about as far as I know.

 

Not only that, but the quality of the real estate venture he was involved in was truly awful.  It is entirely incorrect to portray Cranley as successful in real estate.

Fourth, Mallory's election in 2005 wasn't a fluke, it was a function of the issues that were present in the City at the time and the demographics.  Pepper (who's a pretty good politician) wanted to build a new jail as County Commissioner in 2007.  He had a pretty good plan.  Read the Atlantic article.  Turns out that by implementing the Collaborative Agreement & community oriented policing, the City was able to both reduce crime & arrests.  I guess we didn't need to spend millions on a new jail, no matter how sensible the plans were, we just need to treat citizens with equal respect.

 

Just to be clear, when I said that Mallory winning in 2005 was a "fluke", I was referring to it from the perspective of the local corporate community. Pepper had the money and the corporate backing, but Mallory won because he actually connected with the citizens. To the corporate community, this was a fluke because that's not what they expected to happen.

 

As a comparison, look at how low the voter turnout was in 2013 because neither candidate really connected with the people. In that case, it was easy for the corporate community to pump money into Cranley's campaign and make him appeal to the usual block of people who show up to vote every year.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but as I understand it, it's inaccurate to portray Cranley as a successful real estate developer.  Price Hill's Incline Village, of which he was a partner, struggled to succeed and we've never heard if he repaid about $75,000 he owed on a defaulted LISC loan associated with the project.  I think it was, and is, noble to try to help Price Hill realize its potential, but the fact remains that Cranley's track record as a developer isn't worth bragging about as far as I know.

 

Not only that, but the quality of the real estate venture he was involved in was truly awful.  It is entirely incorrect to portray Cranley as successful in real estate.

 

To my knowledge Cranley has never been involved in a solid, old-fashioned, meat & potatoes real estate investment.  Everything has hinged on extreme leveraging with some sort of tricky financing, up to and including insane public subsidies.  Even with all that, his Incline Village project was a total disaster!  They only sold 2 of 14 condos during the crash, and had to rent out the rest.  No doubt Cranley put on his lawyer hat and there was some contingency in the HOA agreement that let the developer throw out any sort of traditional HOA situation and "repo" and rent out the unsold condos.  No doubt the two people who bought the condos saw the value of their units evaporate.  Have those units since been sold off in a traditional manner?  Would be great if the local media investigated this stuff. 

 

He's got that door to nowhere on the one building.

I will give you Mallory was more of the vision person but he did not know how to get things done in a safe manner that protected the integrity of city finances. Often times, he was scattered and was difficult to work with per many influential business leaders. This cost the city a number of significant opportunities during his tenure. That being said, in 2007 he was what the city needed, he was a shot in the arm and #1 cheerleader. By 2014 though, we did not need him and a third term would have taken the city backwards.

 

Cranley is less visionary but he understands the finances and mechanics to get things done. He knows how to work the inner workings of the system. He has the contacts and trust in the business community, and he has the experience as a developer to know what is feasible and what is not economically feasible. It may mean we have to dial back on the shiny objects but it will mean that more things actually go from vision to fruition.

 

First, Cranley was the head of the finance committee for basically Mallory's whole first term.  The chair of the finance committee sets the agenda for the budget.  They were allies during this time.  Read the papers.  Understand how the process actually works.

 

Second, remember all that "structurally balanced budget" malarkey?  Cranley's last budget wasn't structurally balanced.  The reason why you don't hear that term thrown about so much now is because it was always just a term that the conservatives used to ding the liberals on council.  The conservatives are in power now, so no one uses it as a way to ding them.

 

Third, Cincinnati had a riot in 2001 because of the terrible relationship between the black community and the police.  The collaborative agreement was signed in 2001-2002 but wasn't implemented until Mallory came into office.  Read that Atlantic story.  It's amazing.  The improved police-community relations is the best thing that has happened in the City in twenty or thirty years.

 

Fourth, Mallory's election in 2005 wasn't a fluke, it was a function of the issues that were present in the City at the time and the demographics.  Pepper (who's a pretty good politician) wanted to build a new jail as County Commissioner in 2007.  He had a pretty good plan.  Read the Atlantic article.  Turns out that by implementing the Collaborative Agreement & community oriented policing, the City was able to both reduce crime & arrests.  I guess we didn't need to spend millions on a new jail, no matter how sensible the plans were, we just need to treat citizens with equal respect.

 

Fifth, the Streetcar was the second best thing to come out of the Mallory/Dohoney administration.  It wasn't unique to them, they just realized it was both doable by the City as a City (and not in conjunction with the County a la MetroMoves or SORTA funding, always a dead end) and that it complemented what 3CDC was doing, as well as all the Findlay Market rehab that had already occured.  It's easier for the City to act as a residential real estate developer and attract people to move within its territory and have businesses follow (this is obviously what happened in the suburbs) than it is to try to entice business to move, because they'll just play the tax credit game (witness Omnicare).

 

Sixth, Cranley should be proud of the pension agreement.  That is a great thing for the City and something he worked hard to bring about.

 

Mallory may have been silly in many ways, but the achievements of the Mallory/Dohoney administration are objectively far more substantial than anything Cranley has so far done or proposed.  Attributing some sort of fiscal responsibility to him is ludicrous because it completely ignores the previous eight years he spend in politics, and who his allies were at that time.

 

Doheny and Mallory got the city in a major fiscal mess that they were not qualified to get out it out of. If they were still in charge, we would be heading toward Chicago and Detroit. Mallory was a cheerleader and he did have some vision but he was not very strong at leading. He created the most damage for the city when he had other clowns like Quinliven and Qualls on council to just agree with his agenda.

 

While I disagree with Cranley's position on the streetcar, I agree that operationally, the streetcar is not going to be profitable. I still thought it is a worthy venture to help with OTR development. Calling it transformational is a bit over the top too. It is a nice neighborhood development tool for the city and will be an asset but it is an expensive one that will run an operating loss. Mallory did not care to realize this, and often created bad deals that would harm the city in the long run.  As someone who has connections with many senior business leaders, you do not know the damage that Mallory was causing at the end of his tenure which ultimately cost the city opportunities. Put it this way, if Mallory were still in charge, GE would not be at the banks. 

What the hell are you talking about?  The city's budget shrank with declining tax revenues caused by the recession and Kasich's decimation of the local government fund.  A city cannot borrow to spend more on the operations budget, and the city's capital budget indebtedness declined under Mallory. 

 

Your statement has absolutely zero factual basis. 

But if Pepper won, GE wouldn't even consider locating in the city of Cincinnati as it was a complete and utter hot mess that was really going to be another Detroit the solid regional economy wouldn't have fixed a completely and utterly crippled center city.

 

Also, don't confuse Detroit's situation with Chicago's.  One city is truly dead because they put all their eggs in one basket from an economic standpoint the other is 1/2 Detorit 1/2 New York City and still has a thriving and diversified economy.  Chicago's biggest issue is what to do with the unskilled workers, not how do we actually attract industry here.  Frankly a lot of it IMO comes down to Illinois not having vocational programs (totally shocking) in its schools, so a lot of workers who aren't college material aren't getting the skills they need to go into decent paying jobs in today's economy.

 

Both have budget problems, but the hole Detroit is in is far deeper and more dire than Chicago's which IMO long term will climb out of it (though it will be painful).

 

Also didn't a lot of the fiscal mess of Cincinnati come from 2 things - large per-capita police force (Cranley's fault) and the state cutting back on city grants and what not (Kasich)?

 

Finally a lot of the statements from Cincy's business elite are probably pretty detached from reality - I mean come on - look at Indian hill, anyone who lives in a community like that where the houses are so cut off from everything and the town isn't really a town because commercial development is banned would have a very warped sense of reality.  I think that's one of Cincinnati's business communities biggest problems IMO - they are too cut off from everyone else, more so than in other regions where at the very least you can see their opulent wealth from the highways that pass by there mansions.  (heck in Chicago the elite aren't even above riding a commuter train to work everyday, as I spent several years riding the Union Pacific North Line and I can tell you some power players rode that train.)

^ It does not matter where the business elite live, it matters that they can create the private investment in jobs and capital in a city. They can move jobs from one locale to another if they believe the business environment is good. W&S for example has relocated jobs to Cincy from other areas over the past few years because it made economic sense and they felt the area was good for business. This is where those leaders carry a lot of sway and it does not matter where they live. They carry much more sway that 100 urban professionals who may live downtown in OTR because these "elite" have the capital to hire those people, to invest in the community and to help the city leverage their assets in a meaningful manner.

 

 

^ It does not matter where the business elite live, it matters that they can create the private investment in jobs and capital in a city. They can move jobs from one locale to another if they believe the business environment is good. W&S for example has relocated jobs to Cincy from other areas over the past few years because it made economic sense and they felt the area was good for business. This is where those leaders carry a lot of sway and it does not matter where they live. They carry much more sway that 100 urban professionals who may live downtown in OTR because these "elite" have the capital to hire those people, to invest in the community and to help the city leverage their assets in a meaningful manner.

 

 

 

That's problemmatic, because it would blind them to the potential asset that OTR would be more so than if they actually lived in a real community (even if said community was nothing but mansions and a small commercial strip).  Cincinnati is TERRIBLE at leveraging its assets that's why its the mediocre podunk town it is to everyone who doesn't do business with P&G directly and lives in the real world that exists outside of the 275 outerbelt (and past West Chester/Mason) - its largely forgotten on the national consciousness exactly for that reason and that's not right.

 

Cincinnati could very easily be elevated to the next level it if wasn't for these fundamental cultural problems.  It could be a dynamic and growing region that could attract talent.  Right now its super tough to attract talent there largely because it doesn't sell what it has and the Business community has a very poor grasp of what it could sell in the broad sense.

 

Mallory actually tipped the community towards selling its assets, probably caused a lot of upset amongst those who were used to things being broken, but that's what happen when things change.  Cincinnatians absolutely suck at dealing with change and I'm sure that's what brought Cranley to the foreground.

^ It does not matter where the business elite live, it matters that they can create the private investment in jobs and capital in a city. They can move jobs from one locale to another if they believe the business environment is good. W&S for example has relocated jobs to Cincy from other areas over the past few years because it made economic sense and they felt the area was good for business. This is where those leaders carry a lot of sway and it does not matter where they live. They carry much more sway that 100 urban professionals who may live downtown in OTR because these "elite" have the capital to hire those people, to invest in the community and to help the city leverage their assets in a meaningful manner.

 

 

Oh quit kissing up to these selfish clowns that need power to feel any self-worth.  The get off, day after day, year after year, by having power to control others.  That power comes from inherited wealth and/or high mach personalities whose percolations can only satiated by kicking others in the teeth.   

Jake, it is disappointing that you have bought into the mantra that all wealth is inherited in this country. Yes, about 10% of the country are trust fund babies, but the rest of wealth is all first generation, which means people are earning it in their life times

Doheny and Mallory got the city in a major fiscal mess that they were not qualified to get out it out of. If they were still in charge, we would be heading toward Chicago and Detroit. Mallory was a cheerleader and he did have some vision but he was not very strong at leading. He created the most damage for the city when he had other clowns like Quinliven and Qualls on council to just agree with his agenda.

 

While I disagree with Cranley's position on the streetcar, I agree that operationally, the streetcar is not going to be profitable. I still thought it is a worthy venture to help with OTR development. Calling it transformational is a bit over the top too. It is a nice neighborhood development tool for the city and will be an asset but it is an expensive one that will run an operating loss. Mallory did not care to realize this, and often created bad deals that would harm the city in the long run.  As someone who has connections with many senior business leaders, you do not know the damage that Mallory was causing at the end of his tenure which ultimately cost the city opportunities. Put it this way, if Mallory were still in charge, GE would not be at the banks.

 

Dude, you need to identify some actual facts at some point in your arguments.  Which biennial budgets are you talking about where Mallory & Dohoney got into this fiscal mess?  Why were those budgets significantly different from previous budgets?  You keep insinuating some specific fiscal issue that is attributable to Mallory and Dohoney but never actually identify it.  Until you actually show how they created a fiscal mess through their budgeting, everyone is going to take the much simpler and comprehensive argument that the Recession and loss of state funds is what caused fiscal problems during those years.

 

This "streetcar is not going to profitable" line is ridiculous.  From the same perspective, the MLK highway interchange is not going to be profitable, and that is way more expensive.

 

Finally, you say that calling the streetcar transformational is over the top, but your unsupported counterfactual that GE wouldn't be moving to the Banks if Mallory was still mayor is something we should take seriously?  You base this assertion on personal interactions with senior business leaders and a vague reference to "damage that Mallory was causing at the end of his tenure"?  You haven't said anything substantive at all.

 

Anyone paying a slight bit of attention to the GE Banks selection process knows that it was a combination of the fact that GE already has a presence here with aircraft engines, state tax breaks and the fact the CEO grew up here that were the reasons Cincinnati was chosen.  As for why the Banks specifically was chosen, you'll have to provide something substantive to attribute that to Cranley when the entirety of the Banks build out began during Mallory's terms.  Mallory wasn't the greatest mayor ever, and he should have worked much harder to get the Streetcar up and running and not let Qualls add Phase 1b to the project.  But you need to actually point to specific things and build a case, or be a gentleman and concede when someone makes a pretty good point that perhaps a huge reason for the fiscal problems during that time period was the biggest recession since the Great Depression.

Yeah I mean, what is Cranley doing now?  Borrowing $120 million to fix roads, which is even more money than what the streetcar cost, when in all reality the streets in the city really aren't in that terrible of shape.  He is also going to spend up to $22 million on a bridge to reduce commute time for maybe 3,000 or so students, and that would reduce commute time by what, 3 minutes?

 

Other things like putting a beer garden in Mt. Airy are not good ideas.  Burnett Woods park make over could be great but wouldn't money be better spend on Inwood Park and surrounding infrastructure to jump start development?

 

All I am looking for is, where is the highest return on investment?  I think Mallory understood that.

 

Maybe he was sloppy in his delivery, but think if John Cranley was the mayor that succeeded Luken, and he just got out of the office.  Where would the city be right now?

 

Anyone paying a slight bit of attention to the GE Banks selection process knows that it was a combination of the fact that GE already has a presence here with aircraft engines, state tax breaks and the fact the CEO grew up here that were the reasons Cincinnati was chosen.  As for why the Banks specifically was chosen, you'll have to provide something substantive to attribute that to Cranley when the entirety of the Banks build out began during Mallory's terms.  Mallory wasn't the greatest mayor ever, and he should have worked much harder to get the Streetcar up and running and not let Qualls add Phase 1b to the project.  But you need to actually point to specific things and build a case, or be a gentleman and concede when someone makes a pretty good point that perhaps a huge reason for the fiscal problems during that time period was the biggest recession since the Great Depression.

 

Considering the pile of absolute garbage that Mallory was handed to fix at the beginning of his term and the results he mostly delivered, he was a great mayor.  Perfect, no.  But definitely a great mayor as he moved an previously immovable rock.

One of Mallory's greatest strengths as mayor was his deference. He wasn't afraid of someone else having a good idea. Cranley thinks he is the smartest guy in the room.