November 1, 200915 yr Sounds like your friend isn't very smart. Or really has a thing for Tommy Luken... "It's just fate, as usual, keeping its bargain and screwing us in the fine print..." - John Crichton
November 1, 200915 yr Author Grammers is having a no on issue 9 party on election night. They will be projecting the election results as they come in.
November 2, 200915 yr That guy who you said started yelling and what not is the head of the Blue Chip Young Republicans I believe. I've sat in on a few of there meetings and he's always one of the people in charge. Not sure of his name, but he's heavily involved in that organization somehow. The one girl I'm assuming is Christy Harper also from the Blue Chippers. And that's Jim Tarbell. There's a giant mural of him about 50 feet from where you live and he's known as Mr. Cincinnati...you better know his last name.
November 2, 200915 yr I'm pretty sure that he's that guy you're talking about, and also he might be the "Bris Chortz" guy who posts the meanest-spirited of the COAST internet posts.
November 2, 200915 yr Listening to FOX19 news this morning and Rob Williams was talking about the election Tuesday and said that "voters will have a chance to vote on ... the streetcar proposal Tuesday." F-ing idiot.
November 2, 200915 yr Listening to FOX19 news this morning and Rob Williams was talking about the election Tuesday and said that "voters will have a chance to vote on ... the streetcar proposal Tuesday." F-ing idiot. In order to help him and television news anchors in general vote Yes on 5.
November 2, 200915 yr Author Cincinnati: Streetcar plan, and future of all rail, to be decided in November 3rd vote http://lightrailnow.org/news/n_newslog2009q4.htm
November 2, 200915 yr Cincinnati: Streetcar plan, and future of all rail, to be decided in November 3rd vote http://lightrailnow.org/news/n_newslog2009q4.htm wow.....they covered a lot of territory in that piece.
November 2, 200915 yr Cincinnati mentioned in this article.... Streetcars on the ballot amid trolley revival Monday, November 2, 2009 8:01 AM By JOHN MILLER Associated Press Writer BOISE, Idaho (AP) - A streetcar revival in American cities isn't just kicking up sparks from the tracks, they're flying down at city hall, too. In Idaho's capital, a proposed $60 million trolley plan has become a major theme of local elections Nov. 3. Likewise, mayoral races in Charlotte, N.C., and Cincinnati hinge at least partially on whether they should build lines of their own. What links Boise, Cincinnati and Charlotte - and Salt Lake City, Dallas, Atlanta and Kansas City, where streetcar tracks abandoned in 1953 still poke through the city's weathered asphalt - is they're among dozens of local governments hoping their modern street projects will benefit from federal grants, including $1.5 billion in stimulus funding due to be awarded by mid-February 2010. Read more at: http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2009/11/02/troll.html?sid=101
November 2, 200915 yr Listening to FOX19 news this morning and Rob Williams was talking about the election Tuesday and said that "voters will have a chance to vote on ... the streetcar proposal Tuesday." F-ing idiot. In order to help him and television news anchors in general vote Yes on 5. I sent Rob Williams an email and they issued a correction.
November 2, 200915 yr "Issue 9 Deserves to Fail, help defeat this "Poison Pill" tomorrow!" From: http://caast-usa.blogspot.com/2009/11/issue-9-deserves-to-fail-help-defeat.html ...Tomorrow, we can say no to that! Tomorrow, we can stand up for proper democracy in Cincinnati. Tomorrow, we can keep moving forward!....
November 2, 200915 yr >It all boils down to yea or nea on the streetcar. It all boils down to is that something this insane, because of the nature of government-by-referendum, might pass despite *every* reasonable person and organization having come out to oppose it. The very appearance of a referendum insinuates that there is a problem, when in this case there was no problem (Mark Miller insists that the ballot language "deals with the whole problem", again introducing the idea in the public's ears that some kind of problem exists). This immediately puts the defense at a considerable disadvantage (part of why a "yes" votes are often chosen for the language). In this case there was no organization in place to fight Issue 9 (none ever formed to fight Issue 8) for several months, allowing the COAST boys to operate with upward momentum and be the first thing the people heard. This also put the anti-9 campaign at a disadvantage since they had to waste a bunch of time simply refuting COAST's lies. And really this boils down to a small band of jerks, merely by telling lie after lie after lie for 11 months, can control this city's affairs. They've already slowed down progress on the streetcar project simply by bringing it to this vote. Even if Issue 9 goes down, these guys will still call it a victory and they'll be back next year with their mayor recall and a few other nutty efforts. Look at the ballot this year -- there is nothing nutty on that ballot until you get to the two COAST issues. They're abusing the process and the people are falling for it.
November 2, 200915 yr And really this boils down to can a small band of jerks, merely by telling lie after lie after lie for 11 months, can control this city's affairs. Even if Issue 9 goes down, these guys will still call it a victory and they'll be back next year with their mayor recall and a few other nutty efforts. Look at the ballot this year -- there is nothing nutty on that ballot until you get to the COAST issues. They're abusing the process and the people are falling for it. How about we launch a ballot initiative to raise the amount of signatures required from, what, 6,500 (?), to 25,000?
November 2, 200915 yr Author And really this boils down to can a small band of jerks, merely by telling lie after lie after lie for 11 months, can control this city's affairs. Even if Issue 9 goes down, these guys will still call it a victory and they'll be back next year with their mayor recall and a few other nutty efforts. Look at the ballot this year -- there is nothing nutty on that ballot until you get to the COAST issues. They're abusing the process and the people are falling for it. How about we launch a ballot initiative to raise the amount of signatures required from, what, 6,500 (?), to 25,000? State law governs the number of signatures you need
November 2, 200915 yr State law needs to be changed to put a stop to this government-by-referendum bullshit. While the provision for initiating a referendum is well-intentioned, the process has been repeatedly abused by crackpot extremists like Smitherman and COAST who otherwise have no hope of getting elected to office via a legitimate political campaign. Even if Issue 9 is defeated, fighting it still required a huge effort to that could otherwise have been spent on more productive uses, and as Jake mentions above, the same cast of characters is sure to be back with additional referendum measures that are just as dishonest and dangerous as Issue 9. I have mixed feelings as to wether the citizen-led referendum provision should be scrapped entirely (it's a tempting idea, given how countless dishonest referendum measures by various fringe groups have turned California into a banana republic), but at the very minimum, the threshold for getting something onto the ballot needs to be much higher, and used only in extreme cases where the normal representative process has failed.
November 2, 200915 yr It all boils down to yea or nea on the streetcar. If it really were a yea or nea on the streetcar, I don't know how adamantly "no on 9" I would be... I hope COAST makes note of that. If they only wanted to stop the streetcar, the amendment should have made it clean and simple.. the city cannot build streetcars of any type, even if it's light rail running on street. However when they wrote it to include rail of any type, and specifically made it so it had to be voted on again... it made my mind up for me. I'm not anti-COAST at all, in fact on principal I agree with them completely on most issues of gov't spending. I just don't like the way they wrote their charter amendment. The same goes for Issue 8.
November 2, 200915 yr State law needs to be changed to put a stop to this government-by-referendum bullsh!t. While the provision for initiating a referendum is well-intentioned, the process has been repeatedly abused by crackpot extremists like Smitherman and COAST who otherwise have no hope of getting elected to office via a legitimate political campaign. Even if Issue 9 is defeated, fighting it still required a huge effort to that could otherwise have been spent on more productive uses, and as Jake mentions above, the same cast of characters is sure to be back with additional referendum measures that are just as dishonest and dangerous as Issue 9. I have mixed feelings as to wether the citizen-led referendum provision should be scrapped entirely (it's a tempting idea, given how countless dishonest referendum measures by various fringe groups have turned California into a banana republic), but at the very minimum, the threshold for getting something onto the ballot needs to be much higher, and used only in extreme cases where the normal representative process has failed. Citizen referendum is the final "check and balance," both on a national and state level. I've campaigned against 9 for the past few weekends, and I don't like that I have to do it, but I would campaign against any move to eliminate citizen referendum just as adamantly. It's the only facet of government that isn't almost exclusively oligarchical. California is the way it is not because of the referendum process, but because people there only have a choice of electing an ® or a (D) and neither of them did a good job of representing their electorate.
November 2, 200915 yr It all boils down to yea or nea on the streetcar. If it really were a yea or nea on the streetcar, I don't know how adamantly "no on 9" I would be... I hope COAST makes note of that. If they only wanted to stop the streetcar, the amendment should have made it clean and simple.. the city cannot build streetcars of any type, even if it's light rail running on street. However when they wrote it to include rail of any type, and specifically made it so it had to be voted on again... it made my mind up for me. I'm not anti-COAST at all, in fact on principal I agree with them completely on most issues of gov't spending. I just don't like the way they wrote their charter amendment. The same goes for Issue 8. If think DanB is correct, in that most Yes or No votes are going to come down to each voter's opinion of the streetcar plan specifically, despite the fact that the charter amendment broadly affects ALL types of rail. I hope that isn't true, but I fear that it is.
November 2, 200915 yr Here's the problem -- COAST has been through this process several times now. They know where and when to gather signatures most efficiently. If you or I were to collect 6,000 signatures, it would take a lot longer for us than them. Also, a well-funded group can PAY people to go out and get the signatures. The other problem is that "grass-roots" organizations that pop up to oppose government actions usually aren't grass-roots, they're fronts for established organizations. Also, individuals within these campaigns use them as career stepping stones, and an organization like COAST is using it to build a brand image while simultaneously advertising to potential financiers their ability to execute one of these campaigns. The whole business about "the people" is a bunch of nonsense -- almost no citizens showed up for the streetcar meetings because almost no citizens showed up for the Brent Spence Bridge meetings because almost no citizens ever show up for any of this stuff. The only issue in recent memory where people really showed up was the stadium issue. The other big problem is the stakes are much higher for the elected officials than for the COAST-type people. A politician has to juggle which issues they will take a stance on, whereas a COAST organization can be a know-it-all heckler who doesn't have to please everyone all the time. They do not have the personal investment in these issues that elected officials have -- so why should they have an equal say or in this case a trump card? Then you have an individual character like Mark Miller who is head of WeDemandAVote and is a member of COAST. Together the two "organizations" have a total of 4 people. There's nothing stopping them from creating another one or two organizations with the same guys in order to endorse each other and stay in the news. Nobody's arguing to eliminate the referendum process -- only to make it somewhat more difficult for people who work full time to put these on the ballot to do so. In the case of a corrupt machine situation, then yes, a referendum process is valuable.
November 2, 200915 yr the rights of the people to petition their government is guaranteed by the first amendment. I don't think that we should be putting up too many obstacles. Unfortunately, i don't see how we could block these types of smear campaigns and outright lies. you can put regulations on ballot language (maybe insert a flesch-kincaid readability requirement) but i don't know how you can regulate what is actually said. All we can do is hope that the truth in these issues is able to get out. We must be vigilant against this crap and make sure that we don't engage in it ourselves. We must strive for honesty in everything that we do. I'll respect a decision, even if i don't like, it if it's made honestly.
November 2, 200915 yr If they only wanted to stop the streetcar, the amendment should have made it clean and simple.. the city cannot build streetcars of any type, even if it's light rail running on street. COAST's conspiracy theory is that if the amendment only banned streetcars running on the street, the city would take one lane of the street, convert it to streetcar-only (no automobile traffic) to bypass the law, and then convert it back to a mixed auto/streetcar lane.
November 2, 200915 yr What Jake said. 99% of the time, these so-called "grassroots" referendum measures are put forth by extremist special interest groups who are experts at whipping an ill-informed electorate into an emotional frenzy, and who are accountable to nobody. Our elected leaders, as imperfect as they are, are at least subject to campaign finance and disclosure laws, term limits (usually), and of course, having to face re-election in order to keep their jobs. Groups that push these ballot measures face no such restraints. Regarding Issue 9 specifically, if this thing passes, then we need to start the process of collecting signatures to repeal it ASAP. (Alternatively, is it possible for City Council to put a measure on the ballot to repeal Issue 9 in the next election, without us having to mount a petition drive? Unfortunately, I'm not an expert on Cincinnati's municipal code.)
November 2, 200915 yr My only point on it being directed towards the streetcar only is that the average citizen is only thinking streetcar right now, and even if you told someone on street is against the streetcar that it includes future rail, they would say "so what". I'm not endorsing that thought, its just that calling a TV station because the anchor said streetcar is a moot point the day before the election.
November 2, 200915 yr Author My only point on it being directed towards the streetcar only is that the average citizen is only thinking streetcar right now, and even if you told someone on street is against the streetcar that it includes future rail, they would say "so what". I'm not endorsing that thought, its just that calling a TV station because the anchor said streetcar is a moot point the day before the election. Not just all rail, it will likely apply to all right-of-way
November 2, 200915 yr Here's the list of candidates who oppose Issue 9 and who support the Cincinnati Streetcar. for Mayor of Cincinnati: Mark Mallory for Cincinnati City Council: Jeff Berding Chris Bortz Tony Fischer Kevin Flynn Greg Harris Nicholas Hollan Roxanne Qualls Laure Quinlivan Cecil Thomas Bernadette Watson Wendell Young And remember, Issue 9 might apply to roads, bridges, any and every acquisition of land for transportation purposes ... "A court might determine that the "last antecedent rule" applies to the amendment. If so, every acquisition of land - for widening a street, building a bridge - would be subject to a popular vote! At the very least, there would be expensive and time-consuming lawsuits. Not to mention making us a laughingstock." -- Retired Ohio First District Court of Appeals Judge Mark Painter Read Judge Painter's Op-Ed here: http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20091030/EDIT02/910300367/1019/EDIT/Issue+9+could+cause+create+legal+mess MAKE IT VIRAL!
November 2, 200915 yr Monzel Smashes Streetcar (in an ad) http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2009/11/02/monzel-smashes-streetcar-in-an-ad/ "It's just fate, as usual, keeping its bargain and screwing us in the fine print..." - John Crichton
November 2, 200915 yr >"grassroots" referendum measures are put forth by extremist special I know someone who works at the same day job as Mike Wilson of the Cincinnati Tea Party. Apparently it's true that that guy was just a regular guy who got involved, but someone doesn't go from being an IT guy to organizing 10,000+ people political events two months later. The Party saw him as a valuable face for the "movement" and put him up front, but I doubt he's ever had much say in the Tea Party events or what he's allowed to say. Or they kind of let him say whatever he wants at the beginning to see what his tendencies are and give the events a sense of authenticity, then at some point it's either thumbs up or he vanishes.
November 2, 200915 yr We were founded as a republic and morphed into a representative democracy - we were not and should not be a direct democracy - that is mob rule. Iniative is barely a hundred years old and it was a bad idea then. Issue 9 represents poor policy and a detriment to region if it passes. I'd vote against it, if I was still a Cincy voter.
November 2, 200915 yr Referendum Process Run Amok Yes, there is that election to pick New Jersey’s next governor. But the real excitement here isn’t about Jon S. Corzine, Christopher J. Christie or Christopher J. Daggett. Instead, it’s all about what will be the fifth election since 1989 to try to determine the name for this borough of 11,000 or so in Passaic County. For those not keeping score: First came the election in 1989 to change the name to Woodland Park. It failed by more than 1,300 votes. Then came the 1995 election to change the name to West Park. It failed, but by only 156 votes. Then in 2001 came the election to rename it Garret Mountain. It failed by 610 votes. Finally, last year, Woodland Park was given a second try, and it passed by a mere 25 votes. As soon as the vote was certified, plans began for the next election. If the West Paterson forces win on Tuesday, it will be the first time in state history that a town reinstated the name it had tossed out. Cincinnati, take heed.
November 2, 200915 yr Please volunteer to be at the polls tomorrow in order to make a last minute impression on all voters to "Vote no on Nine". Go here to sign up: http://www.cincinnatiansforprogress.com/Home.asp
November 2, 200915 yr It all boils down to yea or nea on the streetcar. If it really were a yea or nea on the streetcar, I don't know how adamantly "no on 9" I would be... I hope COAST makes note of that. If they only wanted to stop the streetcar, the amendment should have made it clean and simple.. the city cannot build streetcars of any type, even if it's light rail running on street. However when they wrote it to include rail of any type, and specifically made it so it had to be voted on again... it made my mind up for me. I'm not anti-COAST at all, in fact on principal I agree with them completely on most issues of gov't spending. I just don't like the way they wrote their charter amendment. The same goes for Issue 8. If think DanB is correct, in that most Yes or No votes are going to come down to each voter's opinion of the streetcar plan specifically, despite the fact that the charter amendment broadly affects ALL types of rail. I hope that isn't true, but I fear that it is. I disagree. I know a good amount of people that are against the streetcar and also against issue 9. Even people like Cunningham are against issue 9 even though he is against a streetcar. The only thing I worry about on this issue is confusion among voters on the wording of the issue. I don't think issue 9 will come close to passing if people understand the issue when voting.
November 2, 200915 yr Smitherman is a real piece of work: "City retirees, city workers, and metro employees your jobs and pensions are on the line. This is not an exaggeration. The city will build the streetcar and fire metro workers by December 31, 2009." http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2009/11/02/smithermans-last-words-before-election/#more-1061
November 2, 200915 yr This has so many parallels to Ohio Issue 2. (The agriculture ammendment.) A no wrapped in a yes. Purposefully attempting to complicate the system as a strategy for your agenda. A well-meaning progressive idea that was hijacked by manipulative conservative interest groups. Sad.
November 2, 200915 yr Author Vote NO on 9 tomorrow. Be sure to actually vote. Be sure to tell your spouse/parents/relatives to vote NO on 9. Be sure to tell your neighbors and co-workers to vote NO on 9. It's that important. Vote NO on 9.
November 2, 200915 yr A well-meaning progressive idea that was hijacked by manipulative conservative interest groups. Sad. It's well meaning quotes like this that usually doom you to failure. Besides, Tom Luken is one of you guys. A well meaning Democrat.
November 2, 200915 yr Smitherman is a real piece of work: "City retirees, city workers, and metro employees your jobs and pensions are on the line. This is not an exaggeration. The city will build the streetcar and fire metro workers by December 31, 2009." Wow, it would be great if the city could build the streetcar by December 31, 2009.
November 2, 200915 yr What Jake said. 99% of the time, these so-called "grassroots" referendum measures are put forth by extremist special interest groups who are experts at whipping an ill-informed electorate into an emotional frenzy, and who are accountable to nobody. Our elected leaders, as imperfect as they are, are at least subject to campaign finance and disclosure laws, term limits (usually), and of course, having to face re-election in order to keep their jobs. Groups that push these ballot measures face no such restraints. Regarding Issue 9 specifically, if this thing passes, then we need to start the process of collecting signatures to repeal it ASAP. (Alternatively, is it possible for City Council to put a measure on the ballot to repeal Issue 9 in the next election, without us having to mount a petition drive? Unfortunately, I'm not an expert on Cincinnati's municipal code.) It is possible for the city council to put a measure on the ballot by a super-majority, 6 of the 9 (I don't think there will be 6 streetcar supporters elected, based on the polling I've seen). I think this would depend on next years economic outlook, and the margin that 9 would have failed by. It would also be possible for them to just follow suit and ask specifically about the streetcar plan. That just gets ugly though.. My personal opinion is that both I-71 and I-75 future construction projects would need to go to popular vote before they could be undertaken. All future designs for the interstates in Cincy are mandated to preserve right of way for future light rail. In fact every single option that's been designed so far preserves ROW. Thanks to the all-encompassing wording of Issue 9, that probably falls under its scope. We'd either have to vote, or completely re-design these places. Or, just call them "landscape medians" or something, I suppose....
November 3, 200915 yr ^ Face it: transportation planning for all modes will be in a real mess if Issue 9 passes.
November 3, 200915 yr Three Reasons to Vote 'No on 9' 1. Deception --- proponents of Issue 9 want Cincinnatians to believe that we're voting on the Streetcar. Not true. We're voting a Charter Amendment that, if passed, would prevent our City from expending any monies for right-of-way acquisition or construction improvements for any form of passenger rail without first holding an election for each and every expenditure regardless of dollar amount. The proponents won't tell you that this Amendment would negatively impact Union Terminal (Amtrak train is passenger rail), the Cincinnati Zoo (Safari Train is passenger rail), and would require that Cincinnati hold an election before we could participate in the State of Ohio's High Speed Rail project connecting Cleveland-Columbus-Cincinnati. 2. Anti-Commerce, Economically Uncompetitive --- if passed, Cincinnati will be the ONLY City in America (sad, but true) that amended its version of the Constitution with this restrictive language. At a time when the Federal and State governments are pursuing major passenger rail projects and allocating dollars that can only be used for transportation, Cincinnati will be an uncompetitive position. Do we really think the Feds and State will wait for Cincinnati to hold an election? OKI recently expressed their concern relative to delays and the impact on timely funding applications. 3. Massive, Broad Based Support for 'No on 9' --- when is the last time all business groups (Chambers, 3CDC, Cincinnati Business Committee), Unions (AFL-CIO, Pipefitters, etc), good governance (League of Women Voters, Cincinnatus), Republicans (Sen. Seitz, Council Member Ghiz, Former Sen.'s Aronoff & Finan, Bill Cunningham, etc), Democrats (Governor Strickland, Mayor Mallory, Sen. Eric Kearney), Charterites (Council Members Bortz & Qualls), Judges (Mark Painter, Nathaniel Jones)...all were in agreement? No on 9. As leaders, we are sometimes called upon to act --- please forward this email. It's important that voters understand the truth about the issue 9.
November 3, 200915 yr I just got finished talking to guy I know. He asked me about the casino issues. I told him how I intend to vote and why. Then he asked, what else is on the ballot? I said, "If you live in the city, you have issue 9 about streetcars." He said, "I'm voting No. I think it's a waste of money to build a new tram, when they should improve the bus system instead." I left it at that.
November 3, 200915 yr Bumped into Tarbell on FS this evening. He said he is going to be on the Sloan show on 700 WLW at 9. NO ON 9!!!
November 3, 200915 yr And really this boils down to can a small band of jerks, merely by telling lie after lie after lie for 11 months, can control this city's affairs. Even if Issue 9 goes down, these guys will still call it a victory and they'll be back next year with their mayor recall and a few other nutty efforts. Look at the ballot this year -- there is nothing nutty on that ballot until you get to the COAST issues. They're abusing the process and the people are falling for it. How about we launch a ballot initiative to raise the amount of signatures required from, what, 6,500 (?), to 25,000? State law governs the number of signatures you need yeah, we just voted on it last year. I think, especially for constitution/charter amendments, a super majority of votes should be required.
November 3, 200915 yr It all boils down to yea or nea on the streetcar. If that were the case, Scott Sloan would be for Issue 9. edit: Never mind, I got to your other post, Dan.
Create an account or sign in to comment