Comparing a NYC transit study to one in Cincinnati? A city with a complete culture of mass transit to one that won't even ride the bus!

 

Try reading for comprehension next time. The cities and the infrastructure needs are very different, but the process of creating a feasibility study for a public transit project is very similar.

 

If HDR and UC had done their research and concluded that the streetcar was a terrible idea, Mayor Mallory wouldn't be staking his political career on getting it built, the feasibility report would've been filed away in some archive room at City Hall, and this 239-page thread wouldn't exist.

If Cincinnati invested as much into infrastructure in Over-the-Rhine as they do in the outer suburbs I don't think we would need to discuss the streetcar. Can you blame developers for building in Florence, West Chester, Liberty Township, etc., when the infrastructure there is subsidized?

 

Is the Streetcar not infrastructure?!?!

 

  Of course the streetcar is infrastructure. But it doesn't count if it doesn't get built. If you count the various mass transit plans presented over the years, we have been talking about rail transit in Cincinnati since at least 1974.

 

  In the meantime, Cincinnati has built a new water main across the river to Florence, Kentucky. The City of Mason is now connected to Cincinnati Water Works because Mason exhausted their own water resources. Cincinnati pumps water well into Warren County and there are plans to connect to Lebanon.

 

  Cincinnati is building sewers on the western edge. All of that new development in the Rybolt Road area occurred in just the last few years because of new sewers.

 

    And those are things controlled by the City of Cincinnati. Some big infrastructure projects that the city does not control are:

 

    New SR 747 railroad underpass

    I-275 widening

    Veterans Highway in Butler County, or whatever they are calling it these days.

    I-75 Cut in the hill widening

    Widespread water and sewer construction in Butler County, Clermont County, and Northern Kentucky.

 

    The only big infrastructure project in Cincinnati that I can think of was Fort Washington Way, which turned out nice.

   

    Is it any wonder why developers build in those places?

 

    We are talking of perhaps $200 million for a streetcar while in the meantime we have spent 10 times that helping developers build more sprawl. Hey, the Brent Spence Bridge replacement, if they ever build it, is going to cost about $3 billion and all it's going to do is get more cars to Kentucky in the afternoon. Why would Cincinnati support that?

 

    Downtown Cincinnati now has only 14% of the jobs in Hamiliton County (even less as a percent of the whole metro) and is still losing ground. Why would any developer want to build near downtown Cincinnati?

 

  I don't know what Portland's policy is. I have read about their urban growth boundary, and I suspect that it has something to do with the new development around the streetcar line. Portland also has support of its state, whereas our state is just as likely to spend money in, say, Liberty Township, Butler County than in the urban core. Maybe someone could inform me. But despite what any of the studies say, Cincinnati's policy (including other jurisdictions besides the City of Cincinnati) is heavily biased toward new development in the suburbs. I don't see a streetcar changing that.

 

    Cincinnati is losing so many jobs that even if the streetcar results in tons of development in Over-the-Rhine, that development is likely to be offset by losses elsewhere. It is very conceivable that the streetcar is successful and Cincinnati still loses tax revenue.

   

Eight and State... ... so you're saying... don't do anything at all... because... it might not help??

 

Even if it does only offset losses elsewhere, that helps. That means the net loss is lower

 

  No, no no! Streetcars and rail transit in general can certainly improve mobility. The Over-the-Rhine route wasn't my first pick, but I would certainly prefer to improve my mobility without so much driving.

 

  The City of Cincinnati is in deep doo-doo financially. No offense to all the good city employees! If there was extra cash, we wouldn't be talking about the streetcar. We would be riding it.

 

    That said, I don't think the streetcar is going to save the city. The city needs to work on its other core problems first. If the city can get its house in order, there will be plenty of money to build and operate the streetcar.

 

    If the city really wants to develop Over-the-Rhine, the city needs to have a policy stating that. Then, the first thing that the city should do infrastructure wise is STOP PROMOTING SPRAWL in new areas on the periphery. That means stop extending water and sewer. This is well within the control of the City of Cincinnati.

 

    They should disband most of the city departments and concentrate on clean, safe streets and parks. That means infrastructure, police, and fire. No more Department of Retirement, Office of Environmental Quality, Department of Recreation, Department of Community Development, Department of small business enterprise and so on and so on.

 

    When the city gets its problems under control, then there will be plenty of cash to build the streetcar. I don't expect it to happen, though.

 

    Getting rid of just 10% of spending will free up enough money to build the streetcar. Think about that.

 

  And no, I am not one of those anti-tax tea party members. I think that taxes are a push factor that hurts development in the city. The city is losing population, losing jobs, losing the best and brightest, and all that, and high taxes do not help the city's cause. The streetcar may result in a few more people in Over-the-Rhine, but solving the core problems could potentially result in a few hundred thousand people city-wide.

 

    Just go to West Chester and imagine if that investment had ocurred in Over-the-Rhine.   

 

    The streetcar should NOT be Cincinnati's first priority.

Cincinnati is losing so many jobs that even if the streetcar results in tons of development in Over-the-Rhine, that development is likely to be offset by losses elsewhere. It is very conceivable that the streetcar is successful and Cincinnati still loses tax revenue.

 

Okay, fine.  It's possible, but clearly, by your own argument, if the streetcar is built and is successful and the City continues to lose revenue, it's not the fault of the streetcar.  So what is it we should be building to increase revenue?  Your argument that successful development around the streetcar is likely to be offset by losses elsewhere is wrong, because those losses, given your scenario, will happen regardless whether the streetcar is built or not.  So the proper way to view your own example would be one where $200 million dollars of guaranteed future losses attributable to revenues that are perfectly replaceable outside of the City (people who are choosing to move themselves and their businesses outside the City because of something another locality offers that the City could as well) will be stemmed by $200 million dollars worth of streetcar investment.

 

It's time to come to and understanding of the premise- the streetcar project exists to strength the portion of the City identified by the GO Cincinnati plan as the one where Cincinnati has a comparative advantage vis-a-vis surrounding communities: "walkable urban development".  If your argument against the streetcar doesn't address the premise, than you aren't actually discussing the issue.

Let's see...

 

Downtown Cincinnati has 5 or 6 Fortune 500 headquarters, 80,000 weekday workers total.  Thousands of residents, thousands in hotels at all times. Streetcar would connect through empty neighborhood (about 7,000 residents) to uptown, where there are 65,000 workers, 30,000 students,

 

By comparison Portland's streetcar travels from one abandoned industrial area to another.  In between these formerly desolate areas is downtown Portland, which has just one fortune 500 company.  No sports teams.  No convention center.  No casino.  But streetcar ridership is crushing any singe Cincinnati bus route.

 

THESE ARE FACTS. So in short Cincinnati is starting off with way more to work with than Portland did. 

 

 

 

  To increase revenue, build suburban-style office space in the Madison Road area.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

To increase revenue, build suburban-style office space in the Madison Road area.

 

Government shouldn't be engaging in private development.  What they should be doing is investing in public infrastructure.  When those suburban-style office buildings you're touting are complete with public money, will the revenues from that office space go back to the City?  Will the City maintain some sense of ownership over the land?  I don't think so.

 

In the case of infrastructure, as you know, it is a public investment because the public is paying for something that it will actually own.  The asset could be maintained, sold and operated in a way that benefits the public.  That does not happen with subsidized developments.  I understand the need for development subsidies to a certain degree, but at some point the taxpayer should get some sort of an asset for their investment.

U.S. Census data:

 

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/39000.html

 

This is what we have to work with:

Ohio, Population, 2008 estimate  11,485,910 

percent change,  2000 to 2008  1.2% 

 

This is what Portland has to work with:

Oregon, population 2008 estimate 3,790,060  percent change, 2000 to 2008  10.8%

 

Of course Portland is going to have more development. Their population is growing 9 times faster than ours.

 

Development in the Cincinnati area serves little more than to shuffle people around from one community to another. Portland's development is actual growth - something that we just don't have and will likely never have again.

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Government shouldn't be engaging in private development."

 

Wow, Randy, I didn't expect this from you.

U.S. Census data:

 

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/39000.html

 

Portland's development is actual growth - something that we just don't have and will likely never have again.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are you serious?

    Downtown Cincinnati now has only 14% of the jobs in Hamiliton County (even less as a percent of the whole metro) and is still losing ground. Why would any developer want to build near downtown Cincinnati?

 

This is misleading. Just b/c Cincinnati only has 14% of the jobs in Hamilton County (down from what? 20% did you say previously?), doesn't mean it has lost jobs, or even failed to add them. What it means is the rest of the metro grew at a faster pace.

 

And just to point out, those 14% are good jobs, for the most part highly paid office workers.  Not saying they don't exist in the suburbs as well (I work in suburban covington), but the rest of the metro's numbers will be inflated by the Walmarts and Targets and other big box stores.

 

U.S. Census data:

 

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/39000.html

 

This is what we have to work with:

Ohio, Population, 2008 estimate  11,485,910 

percent change,  2000 to 2008  1.2% 

 

This is what Portland has to work with:

Oregon, population 2008 estimate 3,790,060  percent change, 2000 to 2008  10.8%

 

Of course Portland is going to have more development. Their population is growing 9 times faster than ours.

 

Development in the Cincinnati area serves little more than to shuffle people around from one community to another. Portland's development is actual growth - something that we just don't have and will likely never have again.

 

Last I looked, this streetcar wasn't going all over Ohio.  Greater Cincinnati has grown by about 7.5% since 2000, or almost 150,000 people.  The challenge is to make sure the city grows by this much as well.  Growth is happening in Cincinnati, and will continue to do so, we just have too many good companies and good jobs for this not to be the case, but we need to make sure it happens within the city limits.

^

The 2000 Census showed that 23% of all the jobs in the entire Greater Cincinnat region were within three miles of Fountain Square. At that time, only NYC, Seattle, Boston, SF and Pittsburgh had a greater percentage of regional jobs within three miles of their cities' centers. You could look it up.

Sometimes I think people forget what Portland was like in the 1970s... a tired old lumber mill town that had seen better days. I suspect there were some in Portland who said "actual growth is something that we just don't have and will likely never have again."

 

Fortunately, most people (or at least people with louder voices) didn't want Portland to just lay down and die. And they realized there is no magical secret to what makes cities attractive for investment. The growth of of a city is not the result of an uncontrollable act of mother nature, though sometimes this does happen. Growth is the result of implementing thoughtful and inclusive urban design principles to create a well-planned city that people want to be a part of. In short, great cities are the result of having enough voices coming together at the same time and doing it.

^

 

We've run into many long-time Portlanders on our trips there who have said precisely this, that Portland didn't used to be such a great place.

 

I first went there in 1987, and it's downtown was pretty sad, no one had even thought of the Pearl District or the South Waterfront. Today there are probably 10,000 new housing units in those neighborhoods.

 

And Portland has its share of COAST types. There's a real cottage industry of rail opponents out there. So leading up to every new improvement they do in Portland, there's this constant harping from the critics. Then the project opens, is more successful than anyone thought, and they go into hiding for a while.

 

Think Fountain Square.

 

By the way, did you know the Chris Smitherman, when he was on City Council, cast the only "No" vote against improving Fountain Square? Imagine where we'd be today if he had prevailed.

Someone said earlier that the streetcar supporters have evidence on their side. I really like the streetcar plan as it is because it's not designed as a tourist attraction but rather a legit transit option that connects places people are to places they want to go. I know I'd use it when I move back to Cincinnati.

I don't know if anyone posted this but the Phoney Coney had a good blog about the density of Cincinnati compared to other larger cities.

 

http://thephonyconey.blogspot.com/2009/07/over-rhine-versus-world.html

When would we know something on the federal funds for the streetcar? I'm sure it's down the road a bit, but I was wondering if anyone knew when congress will tackle a bill that these funds would be included in?

It's been said that they don't know if it will be before or after the November elections, which means they know exactly when they're going to know, but aren't saying. 

The city has been helping build suburban style development in the Madison Road area. The redevelopment of the old Southwestern Publishing and Oakley drive-in is approaching completion. They are tearing down the Nutone facility for more suburban style infrastructure. The entire development along Red Bank Road between Madison and the Wooster Pike is suburban style business parks.

 

The streetcar seeks to establish (and works from existing points of significance) a dominant and accessible core for a growing region. It is a large core that is inaccessible those purely on feet as a single district, but with a best-practices mass transit system that would no longer be the case.

 

    Downtown Cincinnati has in fact lost jobs. Downtown Cincinnati is losing jobs both on an absolute basis and a market share basis.

 

    According to the Cincinnati Go report:

 

    City of Cincinnati Job Gain and Loss, 2000-2005

 

      Downtown    Loss 6333

      Uptown        Gain 3449

      All other neighborhoods Loss 4909

      Net City Total              Loss  7793

 

Magazine Names Cincinnati Among Nation's Best Cities

 

Last Update: 11:41 am

(www.cincinnati-oh.gov)

The city of Cincinnati is getting national recognition, named as one of America's Best Cities by Outside Magazine. The editors put Cincinnati at #9 on their list, citing a low cost of living and "resilient and well-balanced blend of industries (everything from aerospace to advertising)".

 

One of the former Outside staff members is now the editor in chief of Cincinnati Magazine. He sings the city's praises, saying our downtown is "very urban and completely walkable," and the city is home to green spaces, parks, and lush hillsides.

 

The magazine praises the push for a downtown Cincinnati streetcar line, a downtown bike-commuter complex, and the work done on the riverfront development known as the Banks. The article also mentions unique architecture, a plethora of independent restaurants, and the Oktoberfest celebration.

 

Outside Magazine puts Colorado Springs at number one on it's list.  Other cities mentioned in the top ten include Charlotte, Portland, Atlanta, and Boston.

 

http://www.local12.com/news/local/story/Magazine-Names-Cincinnati-Among-Nations-Best/W63M1zYT3U6UAzFe1uQNkA.cspx

What do America’s Top Ten Cities Have in Common?

http://cincystreetcar.wordpress.com/2009/07/30/what-do-america%E2%80%99s-top-ten-cities-have-in-common/

 

 

The local citizens group, CAAST, weighs in on COAST's recent ramblings and 700 WLW's recent interview with Mayor Mallory:

http://caast-usa.blogspot.com/

 

I'm really starting to love reading this blog.

"The folks over at COAST like to throw around the word "boondoggle" a quite a bit. They claim the proposed streetcar route, if built, would be a "boondoggle" to the taxpayers despite the fact that our taxes would not be raised, nor would our tax dollars be used to pay for it's construction (the construction of the system would come from already collected capital funds and private contributions)."

 

Wait it's already funded????

The local citizens group, CAAST, weighs in on COAST's recent ramblings and 700 WLW's recent interview with Mayor Mallory:

http://caast-usa.blogspot.com/

 

I'm really starting to love reading this blog.

Between the COA T blog & Smitherman's press releases, shows like Green Acres are barely missed.

The local citizens group, CAAST, weighs in on COAST's recent ramblings and 700 WLW's recent interview with Mayor Mallory:

http://caast-usa.blogspot.com/

oh wait - you said CAAST !

That damn site still trips me up. But I still think COA T & Smitherman press releases are hilarious.

 

I'm really starting to love reading this blog.

Between the COA T blog & Smitherman's press releases, shows like Green Acres are barely missed.

Business Courier Publisher Supports the Cincinnati Streetcar

 

http://cincystreetcar.wordpress.com/2009/07/31/business-courier-publisher-supports-the-cincinnati-streetcar/

"The folks over at COAST like to throw around the word "boondoggle" a quite a bit. They claim the proposed streetcar route, if built, would be a "boondoggle" to the taxpayers despite the fact that our taxes would not be raised, nor would our tax dollars be used to pay for it's construction (the construction of the system would come from already collected capital funds and private contributions)."

 

Wait it's already funded????

 

Yeah, that threw me off too. I think they forgot to mention that the city would have to try and procure federal stimulus dollars for a rail project.

"Government shouldn't be engaging in private development."

 

Wow, Randy, I didn't expect this from you.

 

It's not all that shocking to the people who know me well.  I'm a city advocate and a fiscal conservative...and I know that investing in high-density areas offers economies of scale that can't be acheived in other areas.  These benefits are then passed on to the other areas.  I also know that putting public money into singular projects offers no direct gain for taxpayers.  An investment in a streetcar system gets the taxpayers a streetcar system.  An investment in a subsidized building in OTR gets the taxpayers no collective ownership whatsoever.  If you're more comfortable with that then that's fine, but I'd rather see my investors getting something directly in return.

 

    Something about the transit discussion is that the discussion easily morphes into a discussion about the proper role of government in the economy. That's why it brings out so much emotion.

 

    I wouldn't equate taxpayers with investors. Taxpayers have no choice where their tax money goes. Investors do.

   

    Governments at all levels build things that could be, or should be, done by private developers, depending on one's opinion. Examples are are stadiums, municipal swimming pools and recreation centers, schools, bus routes, and rail transit. There is nothing stopping a private developer from building a streetcar in Cincinnati, provided that he follows the law.

 

    All of Cincinnati's historic streetcar lines were built by private developers.

   

 

I would love to get a developer to build the streetcar and sale advertisment and have the city pick up the operating costs. ;)

I wouldn't equate taxpayers with investors. Taxpayers have no choice where their tax money goes. Investors do.

 

People often say that government should be run like a business.  If you truly believe that then you need to view the taxpayers and citizens as investors and customers within your community.

 

  There is nothing stopping a private developer from building a streetcar in Cincinnati, provided that he follows the law.

 

 

 

 

Not so sure about that.

 

I don't think Cincinnati's government, and most cities' governments, would allow a private operator to lay rail lines in the street and control signals. Sure, they allow utilities underground and overhead, but I doubt they would want to surrender control of streets.

 

We know that about 90% of the benefits of the Cincinnati Streetcar stem from the private development within a few blocks of the line. How would a developer participate in that? The city gets the taxes from those buildings and their residents, but I don't see how a private developer ever gets paid for his trouble.

 

True, streetcar lines were once privately built. But there were no cars then. Streetcars pretty much had a monopoly. Plus, developers often built lines to new suburbs they totally controlled and had platted-out. Now the neighborhoods are fully built, with diverse ownership. The real estate benefits can no longer be captured by the person making the improvement.

 

And then there's this: the old streetcar lines were pretty crummy, at least in the beginning. There are stories where rival streetcar companies would show up at dark and lay track half-way across a downtown by morning. Sometimes it fell apart quickly. There were many accidents, lots of people killed. There was no concern for environmental issues. The point is, even if streetcars were once affordably built by private developers, today's detailed planning process, improved performance and safety of these systems is beyond the ken of the private sector.

 

Wish it weren't true.

The Urbanophile weighs in on the Cincinnati Streetcar debate. I don't agree 100% with everything in the piece, but he makes some good observations and offers some tough-love advice to streetcar supporters.

Thanks for the link.  Let me say that I generally think Cincinnati streetcars are a good idea.

 

CINCINNATI -- The growing fight over a proposed Cincinnati streetcar moves into high gear on Monday, as opponents submit petitions to put the proposal on the November ballot.

 

Around 10 Monday morning, dozens of people are scheduled to converge on Cincinnati City Hall to deliver at least 6,100 signed petitions calling for a city referendum on the streetcar idea.

 

The plan calls for installing a modern street car line between Downtown, Over-the-Rhine and Cincinnati's Uptown with the University of Cincinnati.

 

http://www.wcpo.com/news/local/story/Streetcar-Opponents-Demand-A-Vote/tqqROZMrMEWwLw3DzlExVw.cspx

 

 

arenn, that's a great blog post. Unless you object, I'm going to quote some of your points below. Some people won't click the link, and you make a few sage observations that everyone ought to read:

 

3. The pro-streetcar marketing campaign is very weak. There's definitely a case to be made for streetcars in Cincinnati, but the pro-streetcar side is not making it very well. For example, I did any number of google searches like "Cincinnati streetcar map" to find a readily embeddable map for this post and couldn't find one. I go to that Cincinnati Streetcar site and click the "What" link, and instead of an elevator pitch about what the project is and what they want to achieve, we are treated to a discussion of what streetcars are and are not generically

 

 

Plus the arguments are very simplistic, reminiscent of those for the Manhattan Airport, and won't convince anybody who isn't already on board. For example, in the Cincinnatians for Progress video above, Mayor Mallory says, "When a city puts rails in the ground, economic growth follows." That's good for a pep rally, but you've got to be able to convince people who are skeptical but convincable. Don't worry about COAST as you'll never win them over. But you've got to make serious, reasoned compelling arguments, not just generic talking points.

 

4. Urban progressives need to learn to appreciate the legitimacy and importance of cost and tax efficiency. I believe we need to invest in our cities. It is going to take spending to renew our worn out infrastructure and build the 21st century amenities needed to be successful. But we've got to do that while keeping a close eye on the bottom line. Tax rates matter and places that have high taxation put themselves at a competitive disadvantage. I think this is missed by many urban progressives because they come from the political center and left while concern over taxes is generally associated with the free market right, which seldom ever even talks about inner cities. And also the ideas that fuel progressivism tend to originate in places where high taxes have less of an impact - New York, San Francisco, etc. Those are places where people will pay any price, bear any burden for the privilege of living there. And many of their residents are either well off or otherwise insulated from the negative consequences (for example, students).

 

In particular, that last quotation should be "required reading" for any streetcar supporter. Far too many pro-streetcar advocates seem to ignore or rationalize concerns about cost and taxes. These concerns ARE legitimate, and they could end up killing the streetcar if we keep ignoring them.

I have to agree about the weak PR campaign for the streetcar. There's been a lot of preaching to the choir on the issue -- telling other streetcar supporters how wonderful the streetcar will be, as if we need to be convinced -- but I see very little outreach to the community at large. Even if people aren't in favor of the streetcar per se, a better job needs to be done of educating the public about how disastrous this ballot initiative would be for the city. Cincinnatians for Progress should be taking the lead on that effort, but they need to step up to the plate and do more than just post articles to their blog.

 

It's pointless to try to convince anybody from COAST. They'd be opposed to any form of passenger rail even if Jesus came down and personally gave it to the city for free. However, there's a lot of voters out there who don't necessarily buy into all the COAST bullshit, but who are also skeptical of the proposal because they haven't been educated about the issue. These people can be persuaded.

 

As for taxes and efficient government, nobody in their right mind is in favor of paying higher taxes or having a wasteful government. We need to do a better job of presenting the streetcar as an investment that will, over time, increase tax revenue for the city and thus mitigate the need to raise taxes or cut essential city services. The case needs to be made that passing this charter amendment and killing the streetcar would be a gross exercise in fiscal irresponsibility.

Wow! I just chatted with the most racist person I have ever chatted with...  Smitherman called him to "leave him alone" <---referring to me, after I told the gentlemen politely to stop the use of profanity in front of my Son several times. The NAACP needs better public relations skills...

I have to agree about the weak PR campaign for the streetcar. There's been a lot of preaching to the choir on the issue -- telling other streetcar supporters how wonderful the streetcar will be, as if we need to be convinced -- but I see very little outreach to the community at large...Cincinnatians for Progress should be taking the lead on that effort, but they need to step up to the plate and do more than just post articles to their blog.

 

I couldn't agree more. It's kind of disturbing how silent this group has been publicly recently. Streetcar/Progress advocates need to be out there pressing the flesh in a big sort of way! How do we get mobilized? I've sent a few emails to the CFP folks, but have only been told that a "yard sign drive" using YPs is coming up.

Contact WCPO and tell them to report accurately about the Anti-Passenger Rail Amendment. Its not a "streetcar vote", the Anti-Passenger Rail Amendment will affect light rail, high speed rail, and make it permanently more difficult for the City to invest in rail or receive federal funding for rail projects. 

http://www.wcpo.com/news/local/story/Petitions-Submitted-For-Streetcar-Vote/foCN2lPbFkCsFBju5bqMpw.cspx

Even if that somehow works, Cincinnatian's for Progress is anything but. What, pay $30 so you can get your picture taken with Mallory or a council member? Meet and greet? They are all but silent on the issue, and all but ineffective as a tool to get anything done -- regretfully. COAST has been effective only because they are vocal, out on the airwaves constantly, and getting their message across.

Funny. I just heard Cincinnatian's for Progress' most high profile member on the afternoon show on 700 WLW the other day. He certainely wasn't on there to talk about the weather.

I've heard various representatives from COAST on WLW nearly every day. Point being, CP is making little progress and it's beginning to show and wear.

Another take on the ballot issue:

 

http://www.soapboxmedia.com/features/0728rails.aspx

There is a poll on WCPO right now. "Do You Want To See Streetcars In Cincinnati?" 70% yes 30% no

^ That's pretty consistent with the Enquirer poll that was posted a few days ago. Of course, such polls aren't worth the paper they're printed on, but it's encouraging to see that many people vote "yes" even when the press does a hatchet job on the project.

Just a thought... the cause could stand the use of eye-catching, attractive posters for businesses -- or anyone -- to display.  They should include a web address or two for viewers to get up to speed on the issue, but most importantly they should artistically convey some simple message like any effective poster does, i.e. (off the top of my decidedly uncreative head) One Small Step For Transit, One Giant Leap For Cincinnati.

 

 

 

 

Good idea. Streetcar supporters certainly don't need Mayor Mallory's permission to launch a viral marketing campaign.