The idea of a "competing" route isn't what bothers him and others.  It is the fact that this effort has been ongoing for some time, and there has been PLENTY of time for people to voice their concerns and/or alternatives.  The consultants looked at more than just one route, and they thought this was the best one - bottom line, if somebody doesn't want to agree with that then it is their own issue.

 

The problem is that two politicians wait until the last minute to throw these things out there - hence why I call it stall tactics.  If Cranley was really interested in having those questions answered he could have asked them earlier in the process or actually wait to hear the response before declaring that he'll vote it down regardless.

 

Foxy Roxy could have suggessted this plan months ago...but she waits until 5 days prior to the hearing to publicize her plan.  This is nothing more than a political move that is rooted in much more than "good intentions."  People with "good intentions" know the appropriate time to voice their concerns and/or ideas.  Those with "bad intentions" know the inappropriate time to do so...I think most would agree that suggesting a major overhaul with a plan that is to be voted on in 5 days is probably not an appropriate time.

So what is their answer to this?  We had better study it then before we sink 100 mil into anything.

 

Which is exactly what I'm afraid of.  We already have a pretty convincing proposal that promises more than a 10:1 return on investment, which represents more than a year's worth of effort on the part of Bortz and others.  So now Roxanne Qualls comes in at the last minute and puts forth a similar plan that may effectively halt what we were all set to go forward with.  And what's the upside?  Clifton/UC was already part of Phase 1B.  This new plan will require study that may delay the project considerably, resulting in very little timeline change for the Clifton phase, but essentially killing Phase 1A for no reason.  Does she think that there is a better return on investment ratio to be had?  If so, this is just greedy.  I honestly don't understand what she is trying to accomplish with this, given that connecting Uptown was ALREADY part of the plan.  I'm at a loss...

 

 

 

You know the city hired an EXPERT for Main once or twice as well.  Don't hang your hat on an 'expert' opinion.

 

I seem to remember Main Street being a popular destination until that riot happened.  And then people went to other bar districts and never came back.  I don't think anyone saw that coming.  Obviously, anyone can be mistaken, but the reason you hire a consulting firm is for their expertise.  If experience wasn't valuable, they wouldn't have bothered with the study.  That sort of thing isn't exactly cheap.

why Qualls plan makes no sense. THAT is what we are going to do.

Great! Whats her plan? What is the proposed route? I think I have read the same thing as you have, what information do you have to argue against or is everyone going to do it on the fly?

 

The point of the line isn't to link uptown with downtown. The point is to spur development in OTR, to create investment in a neighborhood that has long since been in decline. If I gave you a map and asked you to create a line that can create the most amount of economic and community development, your map would probably look like the current plan.

Well that isn't the point of the people you are arguing against from what I just read. And no, I have written a page or two now about how my map would be different as I would consider myself an 'expert' (whatever that means) in economic and community development especially as it pertains to OTR.

 

The streetcar's current alignment will work! There is no need to re-invent the wheel when we already have the idea solution.

I am glad you think so.

 

 

 

I urge everyone to actually read the motion qualls has put forth before making any decisions.  For example it imposes strict funding limitations from the city, and it requires at least eight additional studies that will cost millions of dollars and delay the project for years. 

Don't know her proposed route yet, still trying to gather as much information as I can.  However, its not the route that is important, its the timing of what she has done... Seriously, I don't think anyone will be arguing this issue "on the fly" - although right now there is certainly quite a lot of speculation.

I wonder why she wants to skip OTR?? We need to get Nate livingston to research this matter.

Still downloading her motion, couldn't get it all before I left the school.  It will be read shortly.

requires at least eight additional studies

No! Ya don't say.

 

See, I feel that I have already helped here.  Know what you are arguing and know what they will be arguing back to you.  Experts? HAH!

 

If experience wasn't valuable, they wouldn't have bothered with the study.  That sort of thing isn't exactly cheap.

Yeah, they fired him. 

why Qualls plan makes no sense.  THAT is what we are going to do.

Great!  Whats her plan?  What is the proposed route?  I think I have read the same thing as you have, what information do you have to argue against or is everyone going to do it on the fly?

 

All I know is that her plan has been stated, on more than 1 occasion, to be bypassing OTR.  A $100M pricetag has also been thrown out for her "plan."  At roughly $25M/mile and two of the miles being Downtown - that gives another 2 miles for blasting through OTR on a singular track from Central Parkway and up the hill.  From there it would simply reach the furthest South reaching portions of Uptown - that means no Medical Campus, Zoo, Clifton, etc.  It will essentially put you at Calhoun/McMillan areas with not much else.

 

I see this as a less developed plan, and I don't see that as being any kind of improvement.  The only way I could see anyone in OTR accepting this kind of a plan would be if the route directly ran on the street of their interest.  Outside of that, there is nothing in it for OTR.

why Qualls plan makes no sense.  THAT is what we are going to do.

Great!  Whats her plan?  What is the proposed route?  I think I have read the same thing as you have, what information do you have to argue against or is everyone going to do it on the fly?

 

The point of the line isn't to link uptown with downtown.  The point is to spur development in OTR, to create investment in a neighborhood that has long since been in decline.    If I gave you a map and asked you to create a line that can create the most amount of economic and community development, your map would probably look like the current plan.

Well that isn't the point of the people you are arguing against from what I just read.  And no, I have written a page or two now about how my map would be different as I would consider myself an 'expert' (whatever that means) in economic and community development especially as it pertains to OTR.

 

The streetcar's current alignment will work!  There is no need to re-invent the wheel when we already have the idea solution.

I am glad you think so.

 

 

 

I urge everyone to actually read the motion qualls has put forth before making any decisions.  For example it imposes strict funding limitations from the city, and it requires at least eight additional studies that will cost millions of dollars and delay the project for years. 

 

Strict funding limitations like no general fund money can be used to cover streetcar operations - that alone is probably a non-starter.  She can't be assuming the streetcar will pay for itself - like all the roads do! :-D

All I know is that her plan has been stated, on more than 1 occasion, to be bypassing OTR.

1st, where, 2nd, is it feasible, 3rd, who else would be influencing her to change routes and how does that go back to #1

 

Answer, it is a red herring.  But negotiations are now open and she will give, and so will you.  The only question is what is she looking for?  It isn't in the proposal, it is in the negotiated settlement.  And I would be willing to bet she has thought it through to this point already.  She knows what she is doing.

 

You are at a real disadvantage, you were caught off guard.  Why would she want this?

Flame me if you will, but considering the timing, this whole thing reeks of political corruption/special interest pandering.

OK, I've now read her "motion"

 

No proposed routes, no talk of eliminating the loop.  Key proposals

1) many, many, many more studies - i.e. stall and delay

2) much bigger plan involving the full uptown link and giant regional bus system expansion - i.e. stall and delay

3) no start until all of the funding for all of the above is in place - i.e. end this plan right now

4) no specifics on streetcar costs - i.e. no basis to say that this "plan" is better or worse

5) no consideration for what original study found - i.e. no care for studies already completed, its all about stall and delay.

 

short answer - this is a shoot the whole thing in the foot motion, and it is CLEARLY such on its face.  This isn't good intentions, this isn't fiscal responsibility.  This is a motion to stop the streetcar (and a whole lot of other progress) right now to save city capital funds for ?

 

Frankly, it offers nothing to "compare" the results of the existing study to.

1st, where, 2nd, is it feasible, 3rd, who else would be influencing her to change routes and how does that go back to #1?

 

Well we can have all those questions answered for her pet project after we start the whole study process again...what's another 1-3 years anyways.  That's how we like to get things done in Cincy - 10 years at a time.

It reeks of politics, It reeks of reality, It reeks of the way things are so just be prepared.  As I said many many times on here, if you think you have all your ducks in a row and are confident in your arguments, then don't even give this any more thought.  Go to bed early tonight and foget all this stuff if you want to sit back and rely on what you have.

It reeks of politics, It reeks of reality, It reeks of the way things are so just be prepared.  As I said many many times on here, if you think you have all your ducks in a row and are confident in your arguments, then don't even give this any more thought.  Go to bed early tonight and foget all this stuff if you want to sit back and rely on what you have.

 

Did you take a crazy pill this morning?  What has gotten into you?

It reeks of politics, It reeks of reality, It reeks of the way things are so just be prepared.  As I said many many times on here, if you think you have all your ducks in a row and are confident in your arguments, then don't even give this any more thought.  Go to bed early tonight and foget all this stuff if you want to sit back and rely on what you have.

 

You are right, it is politics.  The one thing I want to know is what she wants to leverage with this, and I still can't figure it out.

I am normally in a thread a lot longer before I begin quoting myself....

Answer, it is a red herring.  But negotiations are now open and she will give, and so will you.  The only question is what is she looking for?  It isn't in the proposal, it is in the negotiated settlement.  And I would be willing to bet she has thought it through to this point already.  She knows what she is doing.

and here you have it....

No proposed routes, no talk of eliminating the loop.  Key proposals

1) many, many, many more studies - i.e. stall and delay

2) much bigger plan involving the full uptown link and giant regional bus system expansion - i.e. stall and delay

3) no start until all of the funding for all of the above is in place - i.e. end this plan right now

4) no specifics on streetcar costs - i.e. no basis to say that this "plan" is better or worse

5) no consideration for what original study found - i.e. no care for studies already completed, its all about stall and delay.

Did you take a crazy pill this morning?  What has gotten into you?

Randy,

You are misunderstanding me completely.  I am asking how prepared are you?  I have seen this same process in projects that I have been working on to try and get funding as well.  What was your reaction to this when you first read it?  "How could she do this"  The question is not how but why.  It is a route issue, guaranteed, plain and simple. 

now try and answer these questions again...

1st, where, 2nd, is it feasible, 3rd, who else would be influencing her to change routes and how does that go back to #1?

Randy,

You are misunderstanding me completely.  I am asking how prepared are you?  I have seen this same process in projects that I have been working on to try and get funding as well.

 

This whole process has included stakeholder meetings, traffic engineers, architects, urban planners, a feasibility study, financial study, economic impact study, route analysis/selection, multiple case studies, trip to Portland, discussion/answering of a 9-page list of questions, and extreme scrutiny from national entities.  I don't know what else needs to be done in order to sell people on this.  Do we need to identify how to specifically connect to Nky, Price Hill, Museum Center, East End, etc (funding and all)?  What is it that could be done that would appease you or anyone else at this point?

It reeks of the way things are so just be prepared

 

I do bet that the streetcar gets built before anybody buys one of those  vacant overpriced lots on mulberry where the cool buildings  were that the neighborhood had torn down.    :wink:

I've followed this thread with interest for quite a while.  But this latest development has thrown a wrench into the Streetcar plan and seems likely to derail it for a long, long time.  It's demoralizing, and I can lurk no longer and must speak up.

 

As a Central Business District resident since the late '70s, I've had a hard time understanding all of the angst and urgency about the need to connect Downtown to Uptown.  I chose to live where I live because I like to do things Downtown, not Uptown.  If I wanted to do things or needed to go to Uptown very often, I'd live there! 

 

What's more, could someone please enlighten me about the rationale to connect the two major employment centers?  After all, most people work in one or the other -- not BOTH.  So what's the need to connect them?  It seems to me that promoting the proposal in this fashion defies logic and doesn't do a very good job of making the case.

 

Having said that, I understand the reasoning about OTR being a potential residential area for students and medical employees.  Fair enough, and probably a good reason to link Uptown with OTR... someday.  And it doesn't escape me that some Uptown residents would like to be able to ride a Streetcar Downtown to various attractions.  After all, parking can be an issue at both ends.   

 

But the original streetcar plan takes me where I want to go NOW: the Riverfront, Music Hall, Findlay Market and various points along the way.  If Phase II to Uptown has a tangential connection with Phase I, then I'll probably take the Streetcar to the Esquire Theater on occasion.  Other than that, there aren't many other Clifton destinations that lure me. 

 

I'm hoping I live long enough to see OTR realize its potential.  It certainly would make my urban experience safer and much more pleasant.  I admire what's been done so far, but it hasn't been enough to make a huge impact.  Development there needs the jump start that the Streetcar would provide.

 

I think this habit of constant planning without progress that ultimately results in nothing more than the waste of taxpayers dollars is a tiresome pattern in our city.  I'm sick of politicians putting their political ambitions and/or egos FIRST.  I seem to recall an 8-1 vote in favor of the current Streetcar proposal before the election.  Seems that at least one of those YEA votes was merely lip service.

Randy,

Answer number 3 first and then you can figure out the rest.

 

This whole process has included stakeholder meetings, traffic engineers, architects, urban planners, a feasibility study, financial study, economic impact study, route analysis/selection, multiple case studies, trip to Portland, discussion/answering of a 9-page list of questions, and extreme scrutiny from national entities.

And no one to tell you how to get it through the city.  So here you are.

 

Max,

Tell your neighbor Brandon that he needs to pay for the demo from where his building collapsed due to neglect(and the fire and police bill as well while our street was closed because we had a building sitting in it).  I still like you Max, we downtowners need to stick together!

But the original streetcar plan takes me where I want to go NOW: the Riverfront, Music Hall, Findlay Market and various points along the way.  If Phase II to Uptown has a tangential connection with Phase I, then I'll probably take the Streetcar to the Esquire Theater on occasion.  Other than that, there aren't many other Clifton destinations that lure me.

 

Spot on...

 

I think this habit of constant planning without progress that ultimately results in nothing more than the waste of taxpayers dollars is a tiresome pattern in our city.  I'm sick of politicians putting their political ambitions and/or egos FIRST.  I seem to recall an 8-1 vote in favor of the current Streetcar proposal before the election.  Seems that at least one of those YEA votes was merely lip service.

 

I'm a planner and I couldn't agree more with this.  At some point we have to take these good ideas/plans and make them happen.  I'm tired of seeing good ideas/plans die just for the sake of "further examination" or "more research."

The only reason I have to up to uptown is for a bite to eat, Thai express and krishnas.  I would not ride the streetcar up there for that.

 

 

I still like you Max, we downtowners need to stick together!

I know, I give you a hard time sometimes...sorry :-) oh by the way.. OTR and Mt Auburn are not downtown.

oh by the way.. OTR and Mt Auburn are not downtown.

You are so easy. :wink:

What is it that could be done that would appease you or anyone else at this point?

A streetcar for starters and we are relying on people like yourself to provide us with one.  I am trying to point out some issues to you that you will, and are already being faced with. 

A streetcar for starters and we are relying on people like yourself to provide us with one.  I am trying to point out some issues to you that you will, and are already being faced with. 

 

Man, how old are you, you sound so jaded ;)  Who hurt you Michael? ;)

 

Seriously though, if this is "leverage" and not just an attempt to stop it cold, we need to know what Qualls wants.

The more I read and think about this delay the more I just want to give up on this city.  I used to be such a huge proponent of the city and while I think it is making some great progress (i.e. Fountain Square, QSII, Gateway Quarter), it just seems that big things don't happen here.  Our sports teams suck, we can't get the single most valuable piece of real estate in the region developed, the streetcar is falling apart, light rail isn't even in the horizon.  I mean, what is it about this place that nothing can get done? It's so terribly frustrating to see other cities boom so much, while Cincinnati can't even get one lousy big name project STARTED.  DC has built more office space downtown in the past ten years than ALL of downtown St. Louis.  Chicago has multiple super talls under construction.  New York is rebuilding the WTC cite plus countless other highrises. LA is re-developing their downtown in an incredibly fast manner, and Cincinnati is still left saying "we have great potential!!!".  We can only rely on the natural beauty of the topography and the nice architecture for so long.  I really want Cincinnati to succeed, but I am leaning towards the conclusion that it's just not possible.

Theodore Roosevelt once said, "There must be more shooting and less shouting; fewer words and more real work. Words will not plow a field, words will not build a home, words will not develop great humanity or build a great nation."

 

This city is crying for individuals who can finish things not just start them. And yet we have leadership pulling in all different directions, leadership with individual agendas, and leadership with seemingly no real passion for stretching the limits and reaching new heights for this city.

 

Can we go ahead and just merge this thread with the Banks thread?

Sarcasm doesn't come across well online.  I am saying that Randy, John and many others will "need to know what Qualls wants" so we can get a streetcar.  As far as my age, I feel a lot older than I am but dealing with this city will make you a bit jaded and a whole lot older.

Seriously though, if this is "leverage" and not just an attempt to stop it cold, we need to know what Qualls wants.

 

Could it be Pride of Authorship???

To simple.  You are assuming that this whole idea came just from her.  I would ask who is really pulling the strings? 

Sarcasm doesn't come across well online.  I am saying that Randy, John and many others will "need to know what Qualls wants" so we can get a streetcar.  As far as my age, I feel a lot older than I am but dealing with the city will make you a bit jaded and a whole lot older.

 

I was afraid of that, but it was indeed sarcasm.

 

I repeat, what does Qualls want?  That is what we CHIEFLY need to know.

 

There are a few possibilities

1) a different route

2) stop the project

3) a truly grand transportation project

 

other suggestions?

 

Then the next question is why does she want that?  A few possibilities

1) Currying political favor (perhaps seizing upon what was an obvious leverage lynchpin to control the process?)

2) ...?

Your guess is as good as mine.  I do not have an answer here but would lean toward #1.

I think the question of "where she wants it linked to" can't be the real answer.  Here's my thinking, she has to know that if she pushes for uptown right away, with all of the restrictions on financing, that it won't happen.  Either that, or she is disconnected with reality (which I don't think she is).  Reading her proposal, it doesn't seem like "uptown right away" is the gist of it, its really more "lots of studies, then financing for everything, with no city money."  That said, I don't think that we can say a change in the downtown loop is enough to overcome what she has put forward as requirements.  That is too little to ask in terms of change when weighed against what she is holding out as leverage... 

 

I wish I knew how to find out her key contributors... That might lend some light into proposed route changes that this motion may be leverage for...

Worse case scenerio, I am wrong.  This isn't a negotiation.  How hard has all the major parties been advocating for this?  Has Uptown been there as a major supporter?  Has 3CDC?  Has downtown interest?  And I am not talking about a nod of support, I am talking active support.  If that has cooled then you are not dealing with a negotiation, you are probably dealing with a withdrawl.

This is from my understanding and perspective, downtown interests have been an active supporters, as have many independent business interests in the gateway quarter.  3CDC has given both nods of support, while at the same time expressing concern over possible losses to their interests through TIF funding - more a "its a good idea, but make sure it doesn't hurt us" perspective - what you would expect from a business interest such as 3CDC.  Uptown, not sure about any major support from uptown.

There is one really big stakeholder in Uptown that really wants this for her campus. Nancy Zimpher is behind this, I guarantee it. She knows that it would be a great selling point for UC to get her students between the campus and downtown.

 

I think this thread has lowered my support for the trolley to DanB levels.

After I typed that last post, that was my thought too... If thats the case, then its done.  Uptown in phase 1, or CBD/OTR with guaranteed financing for uptown... either one, not going to happen...  That is definitely my fear.

 

    I think you guys are all missing the point.  It's all about the money, and the City of Cincinnati just doesn't have the spare cash. A plan without funding is just a dream.

 

    This development does not surprise me at all. 

 

   

Whoa! been in a trial all day!

 

4 and a half pages TODAY folks.    Geez!   This took me forever to catch up.

It's been said before but please permit me to say it again:  where's the clamor from Uptown interests for a Streetcar???  I haven't read anything in The Enquirer, which surely would consider such interest worth mention.  Or have I missed something? 

 

Also, if Uptown really wanted a Streetcar connecting it to Downtown, why wouldn't councilmember Cranley, especially considering his lone dissenting vote [because he ostensibly insists on an Uptown connection] have trumpeted that UC, the medical community, and/or even residents are in alliance with him and/or have lobbied him to insist on Uptown in the first Phase???  Because he hasn't, I find it hard to believe that councilmember Qualls has been lobbied or is in alliance with a major Uptown interest.

 

Rather, I suspect what we have here is the two top vote getters in the last City Council race posturing and positioning themselves for higher office. 

 

Yes, I'm old and jaded.  But then again I wasn't born yesterday.

I've really heard nothing about uptown interests, in the news or otherwise.  To me the one fear I would have is that because we've heard nothing they have been working back channels.  Does Zimpher have that much clout?  I don't know.  As far as downtown interests working against the streetcar, I have heard about the Kroger CEO working against the project, but more on political philosophy grounds (if you can call the O'Toole nonsense that).  Why do I fear the uptown interests working behind the scenes?  I just don't know how strong or how deep their pull is...

 

I don't really fear the posturing for higher office because it is unlikely to really sway the other council members, that can be overcome by a real showing of political will -- IMO anyhow.

Theodore Roosevelt once said, "There must be more shooting and less shouting; fewer words and more real work. Words will not plow a field, words will not build a home, words will not develop great humanity or build a great nation."

 

This city is crying for individuals who can finish things not just start them. And yet we have leadership pulling in all different directions, leadership with individual agendas, and leadership with seemingly no real passion for stretching the limits and reaching new heights for this city.

 

Can we go ahead and just merge this thread with the Banks thread?

 

Excellent quote.  Let me throw this relevent TR quote out there as well.

 

Theodore Roosevelt speaking of the controversial Panama Canal:

 

"Instead debating the building of the canal for 50 years, I thought it better to build the canal, and debate me for 50 years."

 

 

I totally agree with your point that this city needs people who can actually finish a project.  I hear a lot of newcomers say things like "This city is so great!  Why do the locals hate it so much?"  Well, to be blunt, this city IS great.  But this, my friends, is why many long-time Cincinnatians don't believe in their own city.  Leadership fails us again and again and again.  Big ideas get really annoying when you suspect that they'll never happen, and at some point, you just wish the leaders would stop planning if they're never going to get things done.  Boy this thing has put me in a bad mood!  Here's hoping that we'll all feel better on 02-26-08.

Nancy Zimpher had the courage (or audacity, depending on one's POV) to get rid of Bob Huggins.  She seems like an upfront person to me!  So I find it hard to believe that she would conceal any strong desire to have a Streetcar connect UC with Downtown.  She probably wouldn't mind, but so far she hasn't made it an issue.

 

As far as the former head of Kroger's goes, I'm not surprised he doesn't want the Streetcar to go to Findlay Market, a competitor.  After all, the libertarian rationale has left him wide open to cries of hypocrisy vis a vis public subsidy, which he should've anticipated.

I've really heard nothing about uptown interests, in the news or otherwise.  To me the one fear I would have is that because we've heard nothing they have been working back channels.  Does Zimpher have that much clout?  I don't know.  As far as downtown interests working against the streetcar, I have heard about the Kroger CEO working against the project, but more on political philosophy grounds (if you can call the O'Toole nonsense that).  Why do I fear the uptown interests working behind the scenes?  I just don't know how strong or how deep their pull is...

 

I don't really fear the posturing for higher office because it is unlikely to really sway the other council members, that can be overcome by a real showing of political will -- IMO anyhow.

 

This is what I'm thinking too. Nearly all Mr. Redmonds posts seem to be alluding to some sort of plot or conspiracy without spelling it out. There's something bigger going on here?

 

Is Ms. Qualls the pointman on this? The boardrooms of Cincy's business are putting their foot down. This streetcar business has gone on long enough.

 

Despite what seems to be a well thought-out, organized, studied, and research plan, suddenly requires even more questions and reasearch to be done? On top of that this occurs days before what I thought was pretty much just a ceremonious meeting of final approval.

Nancy Zimpher has, in fact, written a letter to city officials stating the she understands the importance of completing the downtown loop first with local funds before undertaking the uptown loop. I assume that this letter will be introduced on Monday.

 

In the thoughts I've read here today -- they've been great in their energy, passion and truly original thinking -- Nancy Zimpher has been the MacGuffin of the story.

 

Keep your eye on the ball: the insistence that the streetcar go to uptown in the first build is simply a way of deflecting energy from an achievable plan without seeming to oppose the idea of a streetcar in principle.

 

By the way, a four-mile end-to-end loop from The Banks to, say, the Cincinnati Zoo, would be the longest first phase of a modern streetcar project ever built in the United States. Portland started with 2.4 miles, Tacoma with 1.6 niles, Seattle with 1.3 miles. Just the facts.

 

 

Nearly all Mr. Redmonds posts seem to be alluding to some sort of plot or conspiracy without spelling it out. There's something bigger going on here?

 

I really don't think he is alluding to any conspiracy, merely politics as usual.  His take is clearly that of a businessman who understands negotiations, and or the effects of interests groups on politics... No conspiracy, just reminding us to consider the interests that are behind this move.  Nothing happens for nothing.

I find it hard to believe that council member Qualls has been lobbied or is in alliance with a major Uptown interest.

 

I do not find that so hard to believe at all.  But irregardless this story does more to illustrate the importance for everyone here to show up on the 25th and show your support for the streetcar.  We need to be prepared and we need to be united in whatever is thrown our way.  This is not going to be a cake walk and we all need to rally behind this cause and the ones who are working hard to bring it to fruition. 

 

 

I really don't think he is alluding to any conspiracy, merely politics as usual.  His take is clearly that of a businessman who understands negotiations, and or the effects of interests groups on politics... No conspiracy, just reminding us to consider the interests that are behind this move.  Nothing happens for nothing.

My delivery in some post may have something to be desired because conspiracy was never my intention.  Lobbying is not necessarily conspiratorial.  I am saying that lobbying may have something to do with todays news and we need to figure out who are all the interested parties.

Nancy Zimpher has, in fact, written a letter to city officials stating the she understands the importance of completing the downtown loop first with local funds before undertaking the uptown loop. I assume that this letter will be introduced on Monday.

 

This is very good to know.  Thanks, it definitely puts matters in a different light.

the insistence that the streetcar go to uptown in the first build is simply a way of deflecting energy from an achievable plan without seeming to oppose the idea of a streetcar in principle.

 

That said, I still am trying to wrap my brain around why?  I can understand Cranley, I still don't get Qualls... And I really only want to understand to best deflate the deflection... I've got the plan, and thats useful.  If I really understood the motivation, well that would also be useful.

in fact, written a letter to city officials stating the she understands the importance of completing the downtown loop first with local funds before undertaking the uptown loop.

So John, you are saying that Roxanne's proposal is dead in the water come Monday and will cause no change? 

I've got the plan, and thats useful.  If I really understood the motivation, well that would also be useful.

Agreed.  I would think that conversations would have happened between Qualls and Uptown before issuing a release like today.  Why would she put out something today that gets refuted only days later by the very same people it is meant to help?