Enquirer has another story up:

 

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2010/05/24/what-theyre-saying-about-the-streetcar-poll/#pluckcomments

 

Politics Extra is impossible to find for the average reader on the front page. I don't even consider what they post here to be "published."

 

Somebody reads it. It's getting some comments. My guess is elected officials who may read it don't comment.

Less than 20% of the U.S. now uses a landline (or haves one).

 

http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/31/atandt-asks-fcc-to-phase-out-landline-regulations/

Anyone have info on what polling info usually looks like for a new, large public works project?

http://cincystreetcar.wordpress.com/2010/05/24/enquirer-poll-cincinnati-streetar-to-make-22440207-in-profit-per-year/

 

And those numbers don't include people from outside the city limits who may also use the streetcar. If the enture metro area population is included, as well as visitors from out of town, the streetcar could potentially make a profit of...

 

 

One Billion Dollars.

Evidently Tom Luken was on the Eddie & Tracy show today just after the 4 o'clock news.

Letters in regard to the poll-

 

Anti-poll

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/letters/2010/05/24/streetcar-poll-was-opinion-not-fact/

 

Anti-poll

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/letters/2010/05/24/about-that-streetcar-poll/

 

 

Letters in regard to the poll-

 

Anti-poll

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/letters/2010/05/24/streetcar-poll-was-opinion-not-fact/

 

Anti-poll

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/letters/2010/05/24/about-that-streetcar-poll/

 

From West Chester and Indian Hill, of all places. 

Does anyone really think a majority of Cincinnatians are in favor of building the streetcar?

 

My evidence is anecdotal, but after going door to door every weekend for a month for the “No on 9” campaign, most of the people I talked to weren’t fans of the streetcar, but were against Issue 9 after I explained the extensive effects of the wording, and how it would stand in the way of any rail being built, ever.  Most of the people I talked to were exactly the type that fit into the “no land line” demographics. 

 

It actually wouldn't surprise me to find out that a large majority of city residents aren't in favor of the streetcar.  Mostly that stems from over a half century of automobile-centric rhetoric, development, and lifestyle, so many people simply can't imagine another way of operating.  Also, there's a mindset here along the lines of, "if it doesn't directly benefit me and my way of doing things, then I'm opposed to it."  That's the kind of mentality that makes the sort of "for the greater good" projects difficult to pass.  Even if we could guarantee that the streetcar would yield 100 times more tax revenue than the cost to build it, there would still be a huge contingent of people opposed to the project, even though those new tax dollars benefit everyone. 

 

There's a lot of people who think that since the streetcar doesn't serve their neighborhood, then they should oppose it.  These are the same people who will say things like "do they really expect me to drive from my house in Westwood to UC just so I can take the streetcar downtown?"  Of course that's absurd, but it's even more absurd that they think the planners of the project would expect someone to do that.  This is nothing new around here either.  The Roebling suspension bridge was vigorously fought by riverboat and ferry interests.  Many of the other railroad bridges were also fought by riverboats.  Horsecar companies tried to (and in one case succeeded) in preventing cable car lines from being built.  The telephone company fought the street railway over converting to electric operations.  Wealthy neighborhoods 100 years ago tried to block streetcar line extensions.  Existing railroads fought against each other, trying to keep competing lines from being built, and they treated the interurbans with even more disdain.  Even the Cincinnati Southern Railway almost never made it due to lawsuits and such.  It goes on and on and on, but people never seem to notice that these projects all benefitted the city and the region greatly.  It's the same story now, so we just need to make sure there's enough support to get it off the ground, and let the naysayers deal with their own insecurities and prejudices. 

^ Very good post.

 

The whole thing is so confusing for most people. I think there are several misconceptions, and the poll reflects them, at least in my opinion:

 

-Many people don't know exactly where the streetcar will go or what it actually is. I'm tempted to believe that 30% of respondents think they will ride it frequently because they think the system will be more extensive than it really will be.

 

-Many people don't understand the difference between the capital budget and operating budget, or why they are separate.

 

-Many people don't understand the economic impact analysis.

 

Summarily, I think many people think the system will be more expensive, more extensive, and less economically viable than it actually will be, or is predicted to be by professionals. Before I am accused of being elitist, I can anecdotally point to at least half of my college educated friends who fall into all three of the above categories.

I'm not sure the city has effectively sold the benefits of investing in downtown (ever, really). The idea is that investments in the core create much larger property tax (and hopefully earnings tax) benefits than the same amount of money spent in the neighborhoods, but there are problems with that as well because if you don't adequately invest in the 'hoods, it won't matter how nice the core is. The streetcar fits primarily in the intensity development in the core to pay for the rest of the city, but that argument loses cyclically.

^Actually, I think more people get it than it seems.  It's just the noisy few who choose to ignore the facts, and their view gets reported as the view of 'the people'.  Obviously more people voted in the election on Issue 9 than participated in this poll, and the serious opponents (Smitherman and Finney) trying to use legal means to stop the streetcar have largely given up, realizing that being anti-streetcar really isn't a political winner.  I suppose The Enquirer is trying to scare Council into not acting, and that hasn't been too successful.  To be honest I really can't understand why they have taken this story as far as they have.  It's over if we get the federal grant, and they can't be stupid enough to think they can influence that.

They will continue to slant negatively and claim that it is the job of the media to remain skeptical of projects such as these. But yet, highway projects costing at or more than the streetcar continue to move on without a peep or a poll. This controversy is manufactured for profit. Profit for the fish wrap that Enquirer has become. They are too busy trying to save themselves and attacking the City to appease their readership demographic solidifies their readership; the shrinking demographic of aging suburbanites with land line telephones.

That's why crime stories are some of the greatest profit leaders for any newspaper, not just the Enquirer. Why do you think these Widmer trials take up the front page, day after day?

Good LTE on Cincinnati.com this morning. Of course, it's not in the print edition:

 

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/letters/2010/05/25/young-professional-votes-yes-on-streetcar/#pluckcomments

That's why crime stories are some of the greatest profit leaders for any newspaper, not just the Enquirer. Why do you think these Widmer trials take up the front page, day after day?

 

You know what's funny, I would only half believe that except for the fact that since my parents passed age 55, they have become inexplicably addicted to crime dramas on TV.

 

On the other hand, they canceled their Enquirer sub quite a while ago because they think it's a terrible paper.

That's why crime stories are some of the greatest profit leaders for any newspaper, not just the Enquirer. Why do you think these Widmer trials take up the front page, day after day?

 

Because they're easy to turn from raw info (a police blotter or news release) to output (finished news copy). Police and court PR people are very active with their press releases. These stories require little research and don't take long to write. And, yes, they are very popular -- especially for those seeking some cheap, low-class, non-thought-provoking entertainment.

 

OK, back to the streetcar.

We all need to write LTEs constantly.

 

I just sent one in.

I don't know if the Enquirer is being honest about posting letters in numbers representative of what they receive, but I will say this:

 

Those people with jurassic-period landlines who answered that poll and are against modern transportation technologies are the same types who kick-it oldschool by writing LTEs. Meanwhile, the people without landlines, who are all for switching to better transit technology, are busy tweeting, blogging, and surfing UrbanOhio, to get their opinions out there.

 

This gives us the upper-hand, but we have to double-up the efforts and conform to the old-paradigm LTE format, in addition to doing what comes naturally to us, if we want to get the message out to everyone.

Natininja, it looks like the approach is working.

 

On May 24th and 25th, the enquirer received 13 letters regarding the streetcar.  3 against and 10 for....I have never seen anything like it the past 4.5 months...The tally results as of the morning of May 25, 2010 are as followed:

 

 

78 letters total (64 against the project, 14 in support)

 

 

Alexandria - 1

Amelia - 1

Anderson - 2

Arlington Heights - 1

Blue Ash - 3

California© - 1

Cheviot - 1

Cleves - 1

Colerain - 2

College Hill© - 4

Columbia Township - 1

Covington - 1

Delhi - 3

Downtown© - 1

Fairfield - 2

Finneytown - 1

Green Township - 3

Hyde Park© - 6

Indian Hill - 2

Kenwood - 1

Loveland - 3

Maineville - 2

Mariemont - 1

Monfort Heights - 3

Montgomery - 2

Mt. Lookout© - 2

Mt. Washington© - 2

Oakley© - 1

Over-The-Rhine© - 1

Price Hill© - 1

Sayler Park© - 2

Sharonville - 3

Springdale - 1

Springfield Township - 2

Sycamore Township - 2

Union Township - 1

Walnut Hills© - 1

West Chester - 3

Western Hills - 1

Westwood© - 3

White Oak - 2

 

The 12 positive letters were from: Hyde Park(3), Arlington Heights, Covington, Over-The-Rhine, Mariemont, Sharonville, Loveland, Downtown, Indian Hill, West Chester, and Blue Ash...

 

The enquirer is publishing 67.94% of the letters regarding the streetcar(positive and negative) from outside of the 52 Cincinnati neighborhoods.  In addition to that, there is only 2 letters from people who live along the route.  No letters from uptown.  So 97.43% of the letters are from areas that aren't in the neighborhoods affected by the streetcar route(including a majority that aren't even close to the projected route)

 

Of the 53 letters from outside of Cincinnati's 52 neighborhoods, 46 were negative for a 86.79% negativity rate. 

 

Of the 25 letters from within Cincinnati's 52 neighborhoods, 18 were negative for a 72% negativity rate. 

 

Combined, the 64/78 negative letters equal a 82.05% negativity rate.

Here's my letter I sent today. Its difficult to get everything I want to say in to 100-150 words.

 

I am a City of Cincinnati resident. I have lived here for 6 years after moving here for college from the Youngstown area. In that time, I have developed a love for this City and its residents. I am also a supporter of the Cincinnati Streetcar Project. 

One of the reasons that I support the streetcar project is because of the economic benefits it will bring to our region. Aside from the redevelopment along the line, the reduction of transportation costs for those who will be attracted to use the streetcar and Metro system following the completion of the project will result in a cost savings that those people can then spend on other things. Transportation costs are the second highest expense after housing for people. Adequate public transit choices help to reduce the transportation expenses for people in our community. This savings is then reinvested in our community, allowing it to prosper.

Allow Cincinnati to prosper.

 

Rob Jaques

CUF

 

Reading some of the comments on those letters, it's mindboggling.

 

One commenter is saying that because Portland and other cites have a different demographic (i.e. not as many black people/more white people) it was a success and that it won't be here because of it...

 

TruthMightSting wrote:

 

http://www.newgeography.com/content/001110-the-white-city?page=1

 

The White City

10/18/2009

 

Among the media, academia and within planning circles, there’s a generally standing answer to the question of what cities are the best, the most progressive and best role models for small and mid-sized cities. The standard list includes Portland, Seattle, Austin, Minneapolis, and Denver. In particular, Portland is held up as a paradigm, with its urban growth boundary, extensive transit system, excellent cycling culture, and a pro-density policy. These cities are frequently contrasted with those of the Rust Belt and South, which are found wanting, often even by locals, as “cool” urban places.

 

But look closely at these exemplars and a curious fact emerges. If you take away the dominant Tier One cities like New York, Chicago and Los Angeles you will find that the “progressive” cities aren’t red or blue, but another color entirely: white.

 

 

Just found out people self selected whether or not they were a city resident on this poll.  From the Enquirer's site-

 

UPDATE:  In response to questions, here are the full questions and some other information, straight from SurveyUSA:

 

Complete questionnaire wording:

 

1) Do you live in the city of Cincinnati, or outside the city limits? [question not reported]

 

In the city, press 1.

 

Outside city limits, 2. [screen out]

White City's letter proves that morons don't travel much.

 

Transportation costs are the second highest expense after housing for people.

 

For lower-income residents, transportation is typically the greatest expense...

http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm106.htm

 

These are also interesting....

http://www.cnt.org/tcd/ht

http://www.civicfootprint.org/

TruthMightSting is constantly getting his posts removed for violating the terms of service.

 

Not only were the blacks in the Enquirer's streetcar poll more likely to say they would ride the streetcar, they were no more or less fiscally opposed than whites, and more willing to admit that they didn't have enough information about a question - especially in predicting whether the streetcar would actually happen. (Whites assumed "no" when in fact there is not much left that could stop the project.)

You think The Enquirer will publish this letter to the editor?

 

"The benefits (and risks) of a streetcar system have been analyzed ad nauseum.  However, instead of educating the public and publishing a civil debate on the pros/cons, The Enquirer has elected to publish repetitive nonsense and biased polls.  We all understand that your paper does not want the streetcar project to proceed, but it is all too late to stop it.  The only bright note is that your nationally poorly ranked rag of a newspaper (in an age of dying print media) is crumbling around your ears hastened by your relentless quest to gain exurban readers at the expense of the city.  I will not be buying your paper (even for coupons), nor will I be visiting your website again.  There are much better sources of information out there that have not resorted to the Jerry Springer method of acquiring an audience."

Gee, I wonder if it is a vast conspiracy that, until just the past few days, that the Enquirer has been posting almost all negative streetcar letters to the editor! I wonder if it is because people just aren't sending them in ...? Maybe it's because we have blogs, Twitter feeds and Facebook pages, and we disown the Enquirer so often.

I don't know if the Enquirer is being honest about posting letters in numbers representative of what they receive, but I will say this:

 

Those people with jurassic-period landlines who answered that poll and are against modern transportation technologies are the same types who kick-it oldschool by writing LTEs. Meanwhile, the people without landlines, who are all for switching to better transit technology, are busy tweeting, blogging, and surfing UrbanOhio, to get their opinions out there.

 

This gives us the upper-hand, but we have to double-up the efforts and conform to the old-paradigm LTE format, in addition to doing what comes naturally to us, if we want to get the message out to everyone.

Gee, I wonder if it is a vast conspiracy that, until just the past few days, that the Enquirer has been posting almost all negative streetcar letters to the editor! I wonder if it is because people just aren't sending them in ...? Maybe it's because we have blogs, Twitter feeds and Facebook pages, and we disown the Enquirer so often.

 

Are you making fun of my post?

I don't know if the Enquirer is being honest about posting letters in numbers representative of what they receive, but I will say this:

 

Those people with jurassic-period landlines who answered that poll and are against modern transportation technologies are the same types who kick-it oldschool by writing LTEs. Meanwhile, the people without landlines, who are all for switching to better transit technology, are busy tweeting, blogging, and surfing UrbanOhio, to get their opinions out there.

 

This gives us the upper-hand, but we have to double-up the efforts and conform to the old-paradigm LTE format, in addition to doing what comes naturally to us, if we want to get the message out to everyone.

 

God, I hope the knuckle-draggers who inhabit Cincinnati.Com don't start poisoning the well here.

^ They already are. His name is DanB!  :lol:

I don't know if the Enquirer is being honest about posting letters in numbers representative of what they receive, but I will say this:

 

Those people with jurassic-period landlines who answered that poll and are against modern transportation technologies are the same types who kick-it oldschool by writing LTEs. Meanwhile, the people without landlines, who are all for switching to better transit technology, are busy tweeting, blogging, and surfing UrbanOhio, to get their opinions out there.

 

This gives us the upper-hand, but we have to double-up the efforts and conform to the old-paradigm LTE format, in addition to doing what comes naturally to us, if we want to get the message out to everyone.

Gee, I wonder if it is a vast conspiracy that, until just the past few days, that the Enquirer has been posting almost all negative streetcar letters to the editor! I wonder if it is because people just aren't sending them in ...? Maybe it's because we have blogs, Twitter feeds and Facebook pages, and we disown the Enquirer so often.

 

Are you making fun of my post?

 

No. I'm making fun of the letter to the editor counters :P

I don't know if the Enquirer is being honest about posting letters in numbers representative of what they receive, but I will say this:

 

Those people with jurassic-period landlines who answered that poll and are against modern transportation technologies are the same types who kick-it oldschool by writing LTEs. Meanwhile, the people without landlines, who are all for switching to better transit technology, are busy tweeting, blogging, and surfing UrbanOhio, to get their opinions out there.

 

This gives us the upper-hand, but we have to double-up the efforts and conform to the old-paradigm LTE format, in addition to doing what comes naturally to us, if we want to get the message out to everyone.

Gee, I wonder if it is a vast conspiracy that, until just the past few days, that the Enquirer has been posting almost all negative streetcar letters to the editor! I wonder if it is because people just aren't sending them in ...? Maybe it's because we have blogs, Twitter feeds and Facebook pages, and we disown the Enquirer so often.

 

Are you making fun of my post?

 

No. I'm making fun of the letter to the editor counters :P

Doh!

 

Haha, sorry I just felt the need to count due to the disproportionate amount against the project.  I didn't start out by saying "I think there's a vast conspiracy of the Enquirer against this project and also direct evidence linking them to the JFK assassination, moon landing, 9/11 'truth', and Obama's fake birth certificate."  I'm still definitely not saying that nor will I ever.  I just happened to look at the coverage from January and saw anti-streetcar letter after anti-streetcar letter and decided to count.  It's as simple as that.  Looking at all the articles and anti-streetcar bias from the only paper in town, I decided to let people be aware of how much disproportionate coverage on this there is.  My guess is its a combination of 1) the pro-streetcar people not writing as much(majority) - along with - 2) the Enquirer, in general, simply does not like this project judging by its track record and selects what they want people to read. 

 

I will continue to count the letters to keep them in check.  Is it Silly? - probably.  Is it important in the grand scheme of things? - Probably not.  Is it necessary? - I believe so.  Did I butcher the grammar in the last 4 "sentences?" including this one? - absolutely

^^^ I think your counting helps serve as a call-to-action for proponents. I know it helped get me to commit to writing LTEs. Of course, the poll had a wee bit to do with that, as well.

People get too worked up in the Letters to the Editor bit, or they will prod and poke at every Enquirer article that comes out, so they take to Twitterverse, or Facebook, or their respective blog to vent. Or they'll threaten to cancel their subscription, call advertisers to get them to stop working with the Enquirer, and in the end, may make their matters only worse. Sure, the Enquirer blogged about reactions to the poll, but it wasn't on the main page and outside of receiving some attention here and there, it was mostly dismissed.

 

It's the Enquirer. It's the only true, large-scale newspaper left in this city. And there isn't much in the way that is going to replace it, its functionality, and scale. As much as people hope and dream, the message just isn't getting out there to the rest of the city and county about the Enquirer's bias, or about the streetcar, and this isn't an issue related just to this project. There are a lot of misconceptions and bad ideas thrown about the Banks, Fountain Square, 3CDC, and so forth, but to blame one entity for the downfall of a particular project is just playing the blame game.

 

It's a free enterprise. People are free to form their own newspaper publication and make something of it if they are truly that discouraged. Or they can jump on with the Enquirer and seek employment, or work with the editors there to form a working blog/content agreement. There are a lot of options.

I think the larger issue is that The Enquirer fears retaliation by their suburban readers if they do support the project.  If they were running one pro-streetcar story per week, and one decisively pro-city story per week, suburban readers would feel alienated.  They know keeping their readership uninformed is the best way to maintain the current situation. 

 

Chris Bortz told to back off streetcar votes by ethics commission

BY BARRY M. HORSTMAN • [email protected] • MAY 25, 2010

 

COLUMBUS – The Ohio Ethics Commission made it clear today that City Councilman Chris Bortz should not vote on the proposed Cincinnati streetcar or be involved with the $128 million project in any way because of a conflict of interest stemming from his family’s considerable property interests on and near the proposed route.

 

Reaffirming and broadening an advisory opinion issued last year, the ethics panel unanimously approved a new draft opinion that, while not specifically naming Bortz, emphasizes that a council member in his circumstances is prohibited from “discussing, deliberating about, voting on or participating in any other way” on matters related to the streetcar.

 

...

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100525/NEWS0108/5250380/Bortz-told-to-back-off-streetcar-votes

I'm sure this will be tomorrow's Enquirer headline.

The enquirer has responded to the many accusations. 

 

Public support crucial for streetcar

ENQUIRER EDITORIAL

 

The public debate over Cincinnati's proposed streetcar system became even more intense this week with the release of an Enquirer-sponsored opinion poll that indicated substantial opposition to aspects of the project among city residents.

 

Conducted by SurveyUSA, the poll found that while 44 percent believe it should be built, nearly half of that group consider it a "risky project," and an additional 48 percent oppose the streetcar as a "waste of taxpayer money." And by a 2-to-1 margin, residents oppose the city's borrowing plan to pay for the system's construction.

 

Clearly, the telephone survey of a sample of 600 Cincinnati adults showed many city residents simply don't like the $128 million streetcar plan, although the issue is far more complex than such a survey could capture.

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100525/EDIT01/5260347/Public-support-crucial-for-streetcar

 

I'll give credit where credit is due.  Kudos to the Enquirer for actually stepping up to answer tough questions and accusations as well as printing the many positive letters today (many of which I now know for a fact they ignored over the last 4.5 months).  They could have easily hid behind the articles and the negativity, but they stepped up and explained their side.   

The greatness of the Enquirer is apparent with the increasing appearance of pages taken directly from USA Today.  This is a slow death-sprial.

A good editorial, and something that I was really quite expecting. While the survey was not flawed -- it covered all demographics equally, there is something to be said about the medium of choice, which is becoming quite antiquated. A rising number of individuals do not have landline phones, and there needs to be a way to be able to secure reliable mobile phone numbers for polling in the future, but telemarketers and surveying companies cannot differentiate between pre-paid/roaming and regular mobile phones. They just get a number.

 

It's good that they clarified that they are not opposing the streetcar, but insisted that they are there to ask the questions that seemingly no one else seems to be asking. Which is fair. The blogs that the Enquirer is alluding to rarely criticize the proposed project, or provide much dialogue on the more controversial aspects of the project, such as the conflict of interest that the state ethics commission, outside of generalized reporting.

 

"The poll may indicate a 2-to-1 resistance to the plan, but the letters we receive consistenly have run closer to 10-to-1 against it - probably because our print readers tend to be older and more conservative, and most reside outside the city proper."

 

Bingo. The Enquirer's core demographics increasingly lie outside of the city, as the population shifted over the years to the ever-expanding suburbs. The Enquirer has followed suit, essentially, by covering suburban politics and interests more so than city matters it seems. Someone stated that the Enquirer was just not printing the positive streetcar articles, but quite frankly, they were not receiving it (and this is coming from an individual on the editorial board). Few streetcar supporters, or these so-called young professionals, rarely read the newspaper and even more infrequently engage it. They may see something, and then blog about it, Tweet it, or Facebook it, but won't submit a letter. And the newspaper doesn't hold these letters for future printings, so if your letter didn't make it into the deadline, then it generally isn't held. They won't publish something today that was sent in last week.

 

Two streetcar supporters that I am aware of submitted letters today by 3 PM and are being published tomorrow.

 

"The message to city leaders seems clear. They haven't communicated a vision for the streetcar's purpose and promise strongly or clearly enough to the larger community."

I think all this is fascinating. The paper is going head to head with the bloggers (and grassroots reporters, really) which means they command respect, or maybe fear?

I think all this is fascinating. The paper is going head to head with the bloggers (and grassroots reporters, really) which means they command respect, or maybe fear?

 

Agreed. The fact that the Enquirer has now referenced specific bloggers on multiple occasions really does raise the respectability of these sites to the general public and will hopefully serve to bring additional voices to what had become a one horse town for news. The more different views people are exposed to the better informed they will be.

A good editorial, and something that I was really quite expecting. While the survey was not flawed -- it covered all demographics equally, there is something to be said about the medium of choice, which is becoming quite antiquated. A rising number of individuals do not have landline phones, and there needs to be a way to be able to secure reliable mobile phone numbers for polling in the future, but telemarketers and surveying companies cannot differentiate between pre-paid/roaming and regular mobile phones. They just get a number.

How can you say that the survey "was not flawed" but there was "something to be said about the medium of choice."  That doesn't make any sense.  The survey methodology was flawed in that it excluded an estimated 25% of the eligible respondents, and in the process skewed the vote toward older more conservative respondents and away from younger, more urban voices.  Brad posted a link on the prior page that goes into the "land-line only" analysis in great detail, and there's also an in depth Pew study as well.  The survey methodology was flawed.

 

It's good that they clarified that they are not opposing the streetcar, but insisted that they are there to ask the questions that seemingly no one else seems to be asking. Which is fair. The blogs that the Enquirer is alluding to rarely criticize the proposed project, or provide much dialogue on the more controversial aspects of the project, such as the conflict of interest that the state ethics commission, outside of generalized reporting.

 

"The message to city leaders seems clear. They haven't communicated a vision for the streetcar's purpose and promise strongly or clearly enough to the larger community."

They say the city is not doing enough to get the message out??  They say "we just want to ask the hard questions..."?  This is really a transparent and easy dodge which is patently disingenuous, at best.  The city has put out videos, press conferences, reports...the city has an elaborate and informative website full of data, links etc. (a site which, I might add, would answer/rebut almost all of the comments spwed by the clay-eating klavern on the Enquirer comments board on a daily basis).  The city went around town holding a series of open houses in many communities in order to further educate the public (even if the "larger community" didn't care enough to turn out).

 

What has the Enquirer done to help get that message out?  Quote Tom Luken repeatedly (as recently as Monday) as some voice of reason?  Really, the Enquirer could do a lot more to get a balanced message out if they wanted to.  Not pro or against, but basic information that would allow rational, sentient beings to make an informed decision.  They actually did this in the Forum coverage prior to the Issue 9 election, and it was quite successful in getting the message out.  But far and away their coverage of choice are hit pieces, bereft of substantive content, which instead give us rambling rhetoric from Granpa Luken with zero in the way of a counter from the other side.  All while cloaking it in their noble goal of simply asking the "hard questions."  Seriously...who asks "hard questions" of the opponents?  They get away with absolute flat out lies and when has the Enquirer ever asked a "hard question" of them?

 

And they then have the gall to criticize streetcar supporters for not communicating better?  It's difficult to get the message out when you're pushing a Skoda up Sycamore with Tom Luken and Margaret Buchanan on the roof with bullhorns shouting at you to turn around.  Sorry, that dog won't hunt.

 

If they are so interested in seeing the proponents message get out there better, maybe they should be a bit more pro-active...devote a column a week to a pro/con.  Or perhaps let a streetcar blogger be part of the co-opted realm of the Enquirer subsumed blogosphere.  It is disingenuous to say "you're not doing enough to get the message out there," and then thwart that message at every turn.

 

Sorry Enquirer.  Not good enough.

I think all this is fascinating. The paper is going head to head with the bloggers (and grassroots reporters, really) which means they command respect, or maybe fear?

 

I wouldn't say it's solely "going head to head with bloggers."  Certainly they were responding in part to the tempest in the blogosphere, but I know for a fact they were hearing it from other pretty influential sectors as well. The only blog I saw cited was CincyStreetcar, which was hilarious, because the Enquirer basically had to parrot the (admittedly) absurd or at least wildly optimistic conclusion that the Streetcar will make a net profit in excess of $20 million annually. To do otherwise, the Enquirer would be forced to admit the survey was flawed.  As such, they had to take their medicine.  Great job by CincyStreetcar.

 

 

 

 

^ I think landline-only is flawed, but I don't think you can accuse them of skewing the demographics if they did indeed get a representative spread. They say they did. I'm not really sure how.

 

Otherwise, I think your post summarizes the hypocrisy that a lot of people on UO are angry at.

^ I think landline-only is flawed, but I don't think you can accuse them of skewing the demographics if they did indeed get a representative spread. They say they did. I'm not really sure how.

 

Otherwise, I think your post summarizes the hypocrisy that a lot of people on UO are angry at.

 

I don't want to get too hung up on the methodological flaws and institutional bias inherent in the survey--it is what it is--and the real injustice is how they skewed and spun the results...but, nevertheless, the "hard questions" still need to be asked.

 

oh...and CityBeat hits it outta the park with this one. Excellent job.

 

http://www.citybeat.com/cincinnati/article-20742-the-enquirers-streetcar-numbers-dont-add-up.html

Chris Bortz told to back off streetcar votes by ethics commission

BY BARRY M. HORSTMAN • [email protected] • MAY 25, 2010

 

COLUMBUS – The Ohio Ethics Commission made it clear today that City Councilman Chris Bortz should not vote on the proposed Cincinnati streetcar or be involved with the $128 million project in any way because of a conflict of interest stemming from his family’s considerable property interests on and near the proposed route.

 

Reaffirming and broadening an advisory opinion issued last year, the ethics panel unanimously approved a new draft opinion that, while not specifically naming Bortz, emphasizes that a council member in his circumstances is prohibited from “discussing, deliberating about, voting on or participating in any other way” on matters related to the streetcar.

 

...

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100525/NEWS0108/5250380/Bortz-told-to-back-off-streetcar-votes

 

How is this going to affect the streetcar.  Bortz was probably the biggest supporter of the streetcar and now can't even discuss it.

 

I do find it ironic that the opponents are claiming Bortz shouldn't be allowed to vote because he would directly benefit from the streetcar but then essentially go on to say that the streetcar wouldn't benefit the surrounding properties.

In general the issue still has a majority but with Laketa Cole resigning next month, its imperative that a replacement is found that also maintains that balance.  I'm sure they have already taken this into consideration. 

 

So does this decision mean if I am on Council and my road is up for repaving that I have to recuse myself from that vote?  I mean everyone gains from the new pavement but maybe I use it a little more?   

^Hardly the same issue, but it would if you got your street favorable paving treatment.

"favorable paving treament"

 

An extra layer of asphalt? Brick? Cement?

 

I think its just a funny phrase.