It's good news...but it isn't anything worth losing sleep or time over.

My keg here is fizzling :|

I want my 2 hours back! :whip:

 

ummm...  sign up for notifications when this thread is updated. 

 

 

 

;) 

.....Um

Damn it, Randy.

I want my 2 hours back! :whip:

 

ummm... sign up for notifications when this thread is updated.

 

 

;)

 

My husband did this, which means he'll be notified right now!  ;)

I wonder how much of an effort is being made to integrate the accommodation for the potential streetcar tracks and traction power system in the street grid being constructed or reconstructed for the current work on the Banks project.  It seams as if you would not want to do that work twice.  But to commit you would need to make a decision now

It's good news...but it isn't anything worth losing sleep or time over.

 

1) How do you know this information?

2)Why did this information get announced?

3) When is it supposed to be announced now, and in what format (council meeting, press release, etc.)?

As we are awaiting Randy's News I was in a discussion on another forum and a friend of mine who has deep roots in OTR wrote this in regard to the streetcar system:

 

I'm torn on this because most of my family still resides in OTR. My uncles and cousins still live on lower Ohio Ave., Vine St., and Van Lear Alley. I inherited my grandmothers house where I spent a good deal of my childhood in OTR. My family has resided in OTR for over 100 years. Needless to say the neighborhood still holds alot of memories for me. I'm afraid that if the streetcar is built alot of the buildings on Vine St. will be taken by eminent domain including my uncles shop. My family consists of some of the hardest working people I've ever known. Four generations of Iron Workers. They are all worried what is going to happen to them when the streetcar is built and if they will be pushed out of the neighborhood they love so much they've stayed put through the years.

"'I'm afraid that if the streetcar is built alot of the buildings on Vine St. will be taken by eminent domain including my uncles shop."

 

why would that be an issue for a streetcar that isn't going even run on vine street?

 

Edit: for the downtown portion.

 

 

Max, not to be harsh (and not to take this thread off subject), but those buildings on lower Ohio, Van Lear and Vine at the curve are some of the worst kept buildings in all of OTR.  The Building Dept has been pursuing the owners for years, if not decades to make repairs.  But even if the route went up Vine, those properties would not be needed for the streetcar.

Max, not to be harsh (and not to take this thread off subject), but those buildings on lower Ohio, Van Lear and Vine at the curve are some of the worst kept buildings in all of OTR. The Building Dept has been pursuing the owners for years, if not decades to make repairs. But even if the route went up Vine, those properties would not be needed for the streetcar.

 

Maybe the man who was quoted was also concerned about gentrification and not just eminent domain? 

 

Pure speculation. 

Duke to help city with streetcars

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20081028/NEWS0108/310280070

 

Duke Energy’s agreement to lower a requested rate hike includes spending $6.5 million to help Cincinnati build a streetcar system.

 

According to an ordinance to come before City Council on Wednesday:

• Duke will pay the city $4 million to buy 20,263 streetlights. Duke also will give the city an economic development grant of $3 million.
  
• The city will use $3.5 million of the money for streetlights and the entire grant to help develop the streetcar plan.

"Max, not to be harsh (and not to take this thread off subject), but those buildings on lower Ohio, Van Lear and Vine at the curve are some of the worst kept buildings in all of OTR. The Building Dept has been pursuing the owners for years, if not decades to make repairs. But even if the route went up Vine, those properties would not be needed for the streetcar."

 

Or there is an underlying hope there. Blame the city on one hand and turn around and hope to sell the building for "fair market price" when no one else would touch them.

 

rate hike includes spending $6.5 million to help Cincinnati build a streetcar system...The settlement changes the rate increase to three 2 percent increases for industrial customers in each of the next three years, and 2 percent increases in each of the next two years for residential customers.

Am I hearing this correctly, my utility bills will go up to help pay for the streetcar?  Please tell me this wasn't the big announcement that everyone was supposed to be excited over.

^you trimmed the words "Duke energy's agreement to lower a requested" off of that quote

The rate hike was going to happen no matter what. The city opposed it. As a compromise, if I'm reading right, Duke is giving the city some money and doing a phased rate hike for residential and industrial users..

 

The hike was supposed to be 5.7% and will now be 4% for residential users.

Was this the big news?? Letdown...

The city has identified more than $70 million of the approximately $100 million needed for the first phase, but still needs millions more.

 

Did we already know that part?

^you trimmed the words "Duke energy's agreement to lower a requested" off of that quote

 

Ok, Duke energy agreed with the city to, as a part of a rate hike, to help fund the streetcar. That doesn't change anything to me. That is a backdoor tax. On one hand, we say do not put it to a vote because it does not involve an increased tax, and on the other we take money from every person through utility fees to help pay for this. And to say there was going to be a hike anyway and we are somehow saving money because it is only 4% instead of 5.7% is just playing the game. It doesn't sit well with me, how do you think others will take it outside of downtown? Bad move, but hey, hopefully the rest of the city isn't paying attention while we pilfer money from them.

Yeah, so much for us suburbanites not having to pay for the trolley!

I'm glad we have our local conspiracy theorists here...  :roll:

The city has identified more than $70 million of the approximately $100 million needed for the first phase, but still needs millions more.

 

Did we already know that part?

 

I'd say that THAT is great news.  So, does that mean just 30 million dollars to go?

Definitely great news. Duke's onboard and we have 70% of the funding lined up. Silver lining folks, silver lining.....

^you trimmed the words "Duke energy's agreement to lower a requested" off of that quote

 

Ok, Duke energy agreed with the city to, as a part of a rate hike, to help fund the streetcar.  That doesn't change anything to me.  That is a backdoor tax.  On one hand, we say do not put it to a vote because it does not involve an increased tax, and on the other we take money from every person through utility fees to help pay for this.  And to say there was going to be a hike anyway and we are somehow saving money because it is only 4% instead of 5.7% is just playing the game.  It doesn't sit well with me, how do you think others will take it outside of downtown?  Bad move, but hey, hopefully the rest of the city isn't paying attention while we pilfer money from them.

 

At the same time you seem to be playing an angle while you're claiming others are "playing the game."  Duke was a logical partner in this from the beginning.  It is quite common that utility companies get involved in these types of projects financially.

 

This agreement was made at the same time as the negotiated lower rate increase.  Does that means that the lower rate increase is going to be going to the streetcar, no.  That would be presumptuous to say the least.  It would also be disingenuous to claim that the rate increase was needed in order to pay for this financial agreement Duke has made to the streetcar.  They just so happen to occur during the negotiation process.

 

Your logic isn't sound, but you are attempting to make a solid argument...one that is meant to raise eyebrows and concerns.  What concerns me most is the connect the dots theory you're using to do so.

How much more $ do we need to secure the funding for phase I of the streetcars?

 

Also, are we getting new lighting for DT, versus the 70's balls?

Yeah, so much for us suburbanites not having to pay for the trolley!

 

By that logic if P&G were to contribute you could make the claim that the entire nation/world that uses P&G products is helping to finance the Cincinnati Streetcar.

<rant>

 

Americans, generally speaking, seem to think that public transit should be profitable, and therefore handled by private industry.  The fact is, years and years ago, when public transit was necessary for the livelihood of a city, private companies were paid off with tax funds to operate unprofitable transit lines -- because it was a benefit to the community. 

 

Nowadays, getting real transit started, which would BENEFIT THE CITY as well as THE OUTLYING COMMUNITIES, is a poison pill to the fools who think "transit only with profitability."  I live where I do (Munich, Germany) because I like the lifestyle it AND ITS PUBLIC TRANSIT SYSTEM affords me.  I realize Cincinnati's public transit won't approach Munich's anytime soon and the Alps are nowhere near Ohio, but sh!t, get a start on catching up on public transit soon, people.  If I could have this lifestyle in Cincinnati, I'd move home in a heartbeat. 

 

</rant>

 

Edit: I would like to take this opportunity to say that urbanohio.com auto-censored my S-bomb.  So much for hyperbole.  :) 

 

Duke was a logical partner in this from the beginning.  It is quite common that utility companies get involved in these types of projects financially.

I am not even going to respond to the "conspiracy theory" comment you critic of descent! :wink:  But, Duke is not the partner when you put it into context of a rate hike.  You and I just became the partner through a portion of our utility bills of which we do not have a choice in, much unlike a simple tax.  The city saw this as a way to add a rider to the hike all the while presenting it as a cut in the rate hike (the game) and avoid at least in part to take it to the voters.

By that logic if P&G were to contribute you could make the claim that the entire nation/world that uses P&G products is helping to finance the Cincinnati Streetcar.

Only if P&G were a monopoly and a public utility.  This is heating for people, lights on/off, not a funding mechanism for projects.  Tax if you want to tax, don't back door this on everyone.

Yeah, so much for us suburbanites not having to pay for the trolley!

 

By that logic if P&G were to contribute you could make the claim that the entire nation/world that uses P&G products is helping to finance the Cincinnati Streetcar.

 

Not the same logic.  I don't know if the lower rate is going to the entire area, or just the city, but eventually costs would increase for every one of Duke's customers.  If I didn't like P&G's price increase, I could buy another company's products.  Duke has a monopoly, P&G doesn't.

 

Besides, if P&G is for the trolley, then so am I!!!  :)

 

I must have looked over this somehow....

 

It would also be disingenuous to claim that the rate increase was needed in order to pay for this financial agreement Duke has made to the streetcar. They just so happen to occur during the negotiation process.

 

Your logic isn't sound, but you are attempting to make a solid argument...one that is meant to raise eyebrows and concerns. What concerns me most is the connect the dots theory you're using to do so.

 

Are you kidding me? just so happen to occur during the negotiation process? The city got what it wanted in way of cash out of the deal and Duke got what it wanted which was for the city to stop opposing them to PUCO so they could go ahead with a rate hike. I am not making an argument about this, I am stating fact. My argument comes in to play when I say this is not how we should raise money for the streetcar as you are doing it on the backs of people who are cutting a check every month and do not realize that a portion of it went to a project they may or may not support. Would you argue the other way?

Duke was a logical partner in this from the beginning.  It is quite common that utility companies get involved in these types of projects financially.

I am not even going to respond to the "conspiracy theory" comment you critic of descent! :wink:  But, Duke is not the partner when you put it into context of a rate hike.  You and I just became the partner through a portion of our utility bills of which we do not have a choice in, much unlike a simple tax.  The city saw this as a way to add a rider to the hike all the while presenting it as a cut in the rate hike (the game) and avoid at least in part to take it to the voters.

 

By that logic if P&G were to contribute you could make the claim that the entire nation/world that uses P&G products is helping to finance the Cincinnati Streetcar.

Only if P&G were a monopoly and a public utility.  This is heating for people, lights on/off, not a funding mechanism for projects.  Tax if you want to tax, don't back door this on everyone.

 

No, your logic is still faulty.  IT was a negotiation process.  Duke said we want to raise your rates...the city said no.  The two sit down and negotiate how the rate hike can still happen and get the City on board.  The City says, well include x, y, and z and you might have a deal.  Those contingencies consisted of a lower rate increase than previously stated, an involvement with the streetcar system, low-income payment assistance, money towards fans/air conditioners, and an expanded "Save a Watt" program.

 

It's a negotiation process.  The rate hike is going towards Duke's operations.  In order to get that rate hike Duke had to commit to a few things for the City first.  I'm glad the City took a stand and got something out of it for them...often times this is not the case.  If this negotiation process somehow included money for Inwood I doubt you would be trying to make these claims that are a stretch at best.

My argument comes in to play when I say this is not how we should raise money for the streetcar as you are doing it on the backs of people who are cutting a check every month and do not realize that a portion of it went to a project they may or may not support.  Would you argue the other way?

 

So the alternative would have been for the City to not negotiate with them at all and demand that no rate increase occur.  The result of this probably would have been a rate increase, with the City getting nothing in return and probably the originally stated rate increase and not the lower negotiated rate.  Refusing to negotiate and compromise is a dangerous situation, and often times leaves the stubborn with the short end of the stick.

In order to get that rate hike Duke had to commit to a few things for the City first. I'm glad the City took a stand and got something out of it for them...often times this is not the case. If this negotiation process somehow included money for Inwood I doubt you would be trying to make these claims that are a stretch at best.

 

You and I exist on two different worlds obviously with two very different sets of moralities when it comes to funding means. So be it.

 

The result of this probably would have been a rate increase, with the City getting nothing in return and probably the originally stated rate increase and not the lower negotiated rate.

Randy, you are not that naive. Dollar in vs dollar out should be the determinant on the rate hike. The additional dollars that went into the streetcar was factored in. I guess you will just have to trust me that they took a close look on both sides to the accounting.  I simply look at it as misappropriations of utility money but as you said, I guess this is just par for the course.

^So you're suggesting that the rate hike would have been even lower had the streetcar item not been included?  If you believe that then I think you place greater trust in private enterprise than do I.

^So you're suggesting that the rate hike would have been even lower had the streetcar item not been included?  If you believe that then I think you place greater trust in private enterprise than do I.

It has nothing to do with trust.  As you said, it is a negotiation, a give and take.  Do you believe that they would have come in at exactly what they actually wanted knowing that they would be hit up for every handout under the sun?  If you don't think that the city always has its hand out then you place greater trust in government than I do.  Should utility money that goes up and up, paid by everyone here, go to fund a streetcar?

First of all, Duke is a private company...a corporation if you will.  Corporations regularly make contributions to all sorts of things...things you may call "handouts."  The City stepped up and asked for what they wanted.  Duke agreed to the terms and both sides seem happy.

 

This rate increase could have been any amount and Duke would have still made contributions to all sorts of things, the variable in this case is what they would have allocated it to.  Luckily for us they are going to allocate that money to the streetcar project...one that they will see a long-term financial benefit from.

 

Do you believe that they would have come in at exactly what they actually wanted knowing that they would be hit up for every handout under the sun?

 

Answer my original question.  Do you honestly believe that the rate increase would have been even lower than the new negotiated amount had these "handouts" not been included?

This money for the streetcar is play money for Duke. They probably give it away with lunch for the folks down in North Carolina. I'd rather extortion by the city for a street car and street lights than by the sweetheart deals that they were giving to their other customers over the last couple years.

I think what both of you may be missing is I don't think Duke had to negotiate with the city at all, doesn't PUCO usually handle that?

 

PUCO

 

"Regulates your rates for utility services where you do not have choices. Even with competition growing in the gas and electric industries, for example, the PUCO still sets the rates for delivery of those services since that part is still controlled by one company."

 

Or can the City over ride a state agency?

Corporations regularly make contributions to all sorts of things...things you may call "handouts."

 

While others call it anti-trust violations.  What just happened?  City dropped opposition to PUCO for a rate increase while getting how much?

 

AP

lawsuit charging antitrust violations also has been filed over the contracts. It claims the payments were kickbacks that Duke paid in exchange for the companies dropping opposition to a rate increase in 2004.

 

 

Arts organizations, rec leagues, schools, non-profits, museums, and sports organizations are regular recipients of these kinds of contributions from big corporations.

Please tell me you get this and are just playing Devil's Advocate here.  If you want to defend this method, then so be it.  As I said, you and I just have two different sets of moralities when it comes to funding.  I will go ahead and pay my energy bill so you guys can get started.

No, he doesn't get it.  Just another who thinks the large corporations have big pockets and should just give their money away, or pay higher taxes!

I'm still awaiting an answer to my question.  Do you think the rate hike would have been lower without these negotiated items?

The time for action is past! Now is the time for senseless bickering!

I'm still awaiting an answer to my question.  Do you think the rate hike would have been lower without these negotiated items?

Yes, because it wasn't in exchange necessarily dollar for dollar, it was exchange for no longer opposing.

 

The time for action is past! Now is the time for senseless bickering!

Senseless to the extent that some are OK with this.  As I posted above, I am not the first to raise issues like this with DUKE.

 

AP

"lawsuit charging antitrust violations also has been filed over the contracts. It claims the payments were kickbacks that Duke paid in exchange for the companies dropping opposition to a rate increase in 2004".

 

and the story today

 

"The city of Cincinnati was one of several large power consumers to oppose Duke’s rate request to the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio."

giving big companies large chunks of money and agreeing to a lower rate with additional funding for programs related to a power company are different situations.

Ratepayers will gain from Duke's investment in the streetcar.

 

Duke already has capacity in the ground in and around downtown. They can probably sell a kW of power, much of it at non-peak times, with less capital investment in the Gateway Quarter than it can in a future subdivision many miles from Cincinnati. In the exurb, Duke will probably have to extend trunk lines and participate in the cost of building the electric and maybe gas networks in that subdivision from scratch.

 

Downtown is M-F, 8-5 peak. Any new residential development will use capacity at non-peak times. Then there would be more ratepayers to cover the capital cost of the distribution network.

 

Anyway, I think big utilities do these kinds of deals all the time with large manufacturers and the like. Only it's called economic development. The streetcar is economic development.

Anyway, I think big utilities do these kinds of deals all the time with large manufacturers and the like. Only it's called economic development. The streetcar is economic development

 

I have only heard it called Anti-trust.

 

Taxpayers, not ratepayers should be the one's making the decision on paying the bills for a streetcar vs paying the bill to heat and light their homes.

Really, it's just an investment for Duke anyway. The more people use the streetcar, the more electricity it will use. I bet the payback period for Duke's "donation" is fairly short.

^ I'm sure a bunch of lawyers concluded that it does not violate the Sherman or Clayton Antitrust Acts.