Two steps forward, one step back.

 

Delayed again: No streetcar until 2016

Enquirer Exclusive New records reveal timeline for construction, launch

 

Highlights include:

 

The Cincinnati streetcar, the $110 million-plus project that city leaders once hoped to have completed last year, will not be ready for riders until at least the spring of 2016, new city records show.

 

Tracks for the Over-the-Rhine section of the route will be completed first, by a “substantial completion” date in June 2014. The remainder of the project, including the tracks extending to the system’s southernmost point on Second Street on Downtown’s central riverfront, is to be completed by October 2015.

 

Construction details included in the hundreds of pages of documents make it clear that the city’s most recent target date for the streetcar’s opening – the summer of 2015 – will be postponed by at least three seasons to April 2016.

 

Mayoral candidate John Cranley, a former Cincinnati city councilman who opposes the project, questioned why City Hall, under the documents’ timeline, plans to begin acquiring the streetcars about 21 months before the new estimated 2016 opening date.

 

“This mayoral election in part is going to be a referendum on the streetcar, but this ties the city’s hands 21/2 years into the new mayor’s term,” Cranley said.

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20130103/NEWS0108/301030124/Delayed-again-No-streetcar-until-2016

GOD I HATE THE ENQUIRER!  I mean really?  We are finally starting construction on a project promised to bring so much good to downtown and all our local newspaper can do is print a terribly negative article like this?  I feel like I'm living in Nazi Germany the way they print such BS propaganda.  Unbelievable!

Also, I hope no one here is actually subscribing to their website.  I really hope they go out of business.

No subscription here... I've set up my browser to clear and cincinnati.com cookies/cache every time I close it. So I can always read the articles for free. They aren't worth paying for...

Also, I hope no one here is actually subscribing to their website.  I really hope they go out of business.

 

The enquirer sucks and yes the major media in this city Hates the project. This year will be a non stop media fellatio of smitherman and cranley. The mayoral election along with 4 year city hall terms is crucial. It's important to have solid pro streetcar members elected. 700wlw and Smitherman have already turned PG. 

 

Opponents like smitherman and cranley will kill the project any chance they get regardless if its operational or not so we have to always be aware of that

 

The bright side of all this is the potential of the state level elections. Kasich will be running most likely against Strickland and Shannon jones STUPID amendment won't be in effect

Delayed again: No streetcar until 2016

Now the headline reads 'Derailed'

I also get the impression the city is making a promise that is a 'worst case' sorta thing.

They missed this:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2013/01/bond-issue-raises-55m-for-cincinnati.html

So is this accurate? That the streetcar will not be running until 2016? If not, then can we compile a list of a negative articles timed to coincide with a positive development (such as yesterday's ordering of streetcars from CAF). If we can document a pattern of activity, then there are some decisions to make.... What complaints may be filed with organizations such as the Better Business Bureau, the Society of Professional Journalists, or even the Federal Trade Commission? And it is also time to consider a protest against  the Enquirer, such as the legal placement of receptacles outside the Enquirer's office for the burning of newspapers. But please don't buy them! Also a vocal protest with a bullhorn outside their offices should be considered. I'm sure the city would be willing to award the necessary permits for such protests! Maybe a legal protest could be sought outside Horstman's home, whose address is listed publicly at http://www.hamiltoncountyauditor.org/realestateii/ROVER30.ASP.

 

And can the city eliminate newspaper boxes on street corners to prevent urban clutter and promote pedestrian and bicycle safety? Who else has newspaper boxes on street corners that could be affected by such a program to promote safety and eliminate urban blight?

Did you see the latest from Barry Horstman this morning? No mention of the bond issue being below ... well, here: http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20130103/NEWS0108/301030124/Delayed-again-No-streetcar-until-2016

2016? SMH. What the hell is going on? It just seems so ridiculous.

 

I'm starting to believe the boondoggle headlines!  The implementation of the project sure feels that way.

So is this accurate? That the streetcar will not be running until 2016? If not, then can we compile a list of a negative articles timed to coincide with a positive development (such as yesterday's ordering of streetcars from CAF). If we can document a pattern of activity, then there are some decisions to make.... What complaints may be filed with organizations such as the Better Business Bureau, the Society of Professional Journalists, or even the Federal Trade Commission? And it is also time to consider a protest against  the Enquirer, such as the legal placement of receptacles outside the Enquirer's office for the burning of newspapers. But please don't buy them! Also a vocal protest with a bullhorn outside their offices should be considered. I'm sure the city would be willing to award the necessary permits for such protests! Maybe a legal protest could be sought outside Horstman's home, whose address is listed publicly at http://www.hamiltoncountyauditor.org/realestateii/ROVER30.ASP.

 

And can the city eliminate newspaper boxes on street corners to prevent urban clutter and promote pedestrian and bicycle safety? Who else has newspaper boxes on street corners that could be affected by such a program to promote safety and eliminate urban blight?

 

A protest is definitely something that should be considered, along with a call for a boycott. Time for progressive people to demand better.

I was under the impression Portland closed a block at a time to build their initial system & it didn't take much time at all. Cincinnati is going to keep the streets open while doing construction. That should take more time I would imagine.

Still, I think they are being conservative in their estimates.

KJP - there was an effort to shut down news boxes awhile ago that didn't go well.

The weekly City Beat would be affected. Dunno who else.

2016? SMH. What the hell is going on? It just seems so ridiculous.

 

I'm starting to believe the boondoggle headlines!  The implementation of the project sure feels that way.

 

Then the opposition's campaign of disinformation is working.

There's a lot of "padding" built into this schedule. You don't need six months to test and train. Also, if an agreement with Duke is close, the CBD portion could start earlier than projected.

Yeah Cranley probably fed this city report to Horstman right when the city was ready to announce its streetcar order in order to overwhelm that positive story. 

I'm a big streetcar supporter but I do tend to question things.  As such, can someone explain why the streetcars are being ordered 2+ years prior to the expected opening?  Does it take that long to get them in?

 

Also, I keep reading it on here but the voters did not specifically vote for the streetcar.  They voted against the amendment.  I know many people against the streetcar that also voted against the amendment.

2016? SMH. What the hell is going on? It just seems so ridiculous.

 

I'm starting to believe the boondoggle headlines!  The implementation of the project sure feels that way.

 

Of course its been delayed 2 years!  We've had at least 2 years of delays that were NOT the city's fault.  Namely, 2 separate ballot initiatives aimed at stopping the project, state funding being pulled due to Kasich being elected, and this whole ridiculous fight with Duke Energy, plus we have to operate on the schedule of the federal govt. (FTA) because they are the ones funding so much of it.  We have no control over these things, but the Enquirer is trying to make everyone think its the city's fault.  I'm sure there are more, but the city has been moving as fast as it can.  The project is already under construction, money is being spent on it right now.  It takes time though. 

Maybe a legal protest could be sought outside Horstman's home, whose address is listed publicly at http://www.hamiltoncountyauditor.org/realestateii/ROVER30.ASP.

 

 

Seriously?  That sounds like a terrible idea guaranteed to backfire.  Horstman is a troll but if you start witch-hunting him then you're playing right into his hairy hands.

I'm a big streetcar supporter but I do tend to question things.  As such, can someone explain why the streetcars are being ordered 2+ years prior to the expected opening?  Does it take that long to get them in?

 

Also, I keep reading it on here but the voters did not specifically vote for the streetcar.  They voted against the amendment.  I know many people against the streetcar that also voted against the amendment.

 

^^^They might be ordered so far in advance so that if a new council majority or mayor is elected who opposes the streetcar, they will have to follow through with it. I kind of doubt it, because I don't think there is a real threat of that happening and I think they know that.

 

Technically we never voted for/against the streetcar because it was always broader than that, though the second attempt used the word streetcar.

 

Here is the exact ballot language used from http://www.smartvoter.org/2011/11/08/oh/hm/issue/48/

 

Shall the Charter of the City of Cincinnati be amended to prohibit the City, the City Manager, the Mayor, the Council and the City's various boards, commissions, agencies and departments from spending or appropriating any monies or incurring any indebtedness or contractual obligations for the purpose of financing, designing, engineering, constructing, building or operating a streetcar system which means a system of passenger vehicles operated on rails constructed primarily in existing public right of ways through the year 2020, by enacting new Article XVI?

YES

NO

There should be a new term for those who claim to be streetcar supporters then qualify their "support" with a "but", make claims that not one but TWO votes regarding the Streetcar does not mean that people voted in favor of building the system, and/or repeat COAST/Enquirer/WLW mistruths regarding the streetcar: Streetcar Truthers.

I know that Cranley is quoted in the streetcar article but any discussion about Cranley that is not related to his position on the streetcar project should go in the Cincinnati Mayoral Election: 2013 Thread.

 

Thanks.

>a project that was approved by the voters TWICE

 

Also, while on council Cranley voted FOR the streetcar on April 21, 2008.  He probably thought the project would die when he signed that motion but it will haunt him during this mayoral election. 

 

 

 

>As such, can someone explain why the streetcars are being ordered 2+ years prior to the expected opening?  Does it take that long to get them in?

 

Yes, they take a long time to build AND there are tons of orders for them coming from cities all around the United States, although Toronto alone has orders out for more than 100. 

 

 

Got some more information:

 

Basically the entire delay is due to Duke. After years of delay they finally have city a tentative Schedule in December. That schedule includes months of design work that they could have been doing this entire time but refused to do. If they had done the design work when the city wanted, the project would have been done in early 2015.

 

BUT because they are finally making progress with Duke there are no plans to call them out for being the entire source of the delay.

 

Also, with regards to timeline, it takes 18 months to build a streetcar. Having them for a year or so while the OTR track is ready will allow metro to train people & get the flow down.

The "Enquirer Exclusive" is based on documents that have been public since November 15. It's interesting that they waited until there were two pieces of positive news (car order, low bond rates) to run a negative story.

Got some more information:

 

Basically the entire delay is due to Duke. After years of delay they finally have city a tentative Schedule in December. That schedule includes months of design work that they could have been doing this entire time but refused to do. If they had done the design work when the city wanted, the project would have been done in early 2015.

 

BUT because they are finally making progress with Duke there are no plans to call them out for being the entire source of the delay.

 

Also, with regards to timeline, it takes 18 months to build a streetcar. Having them for a year or so while the OTR track is ready will allow metro to train people & get the flow down.

 

According to the Bid documents, the Duke work on Main St. will take 14 months.

I know that Cranley is quoted in the streetcar article but any discussion about Cranley that is not related to his position on the streetcar project should go in the Cincinnati Mayoral Election: 2013 Thread.

 

Thanks.

 

I respectfully disagree. Cranley is now the go-to anti-streetcar voice for the media, and any discussion of the merits of his candidacy vis–à–vis the credibility of his anti-streetcar diatribe should be within the limits for discussion on this thread.

Cranley was the #1 enemy of the streetcar project in 2007-08 before he left council.  That's when COAST/Smitherman stepped in.  Now Cranley's back in the spotlight despite not holding elected office. 

Maybe a legal protest could be sought outside Horstman's home, whose address is listed publicly at http://www.hamiltoncountyauditor.org/realestateii/ROVER30.ASP.

 

 

Seriously?  That sounds like a terrible idea guaranteed to backfire.  Horstman is a troll but if you start witch-hunting him then you're playing right into his hairy hands.

 

Totally agree..terrible idea!

 

He sure lives in a sweet location, though. Quiet street, with about a 30 second walk to Mt. Lookout Square via hillside steps. Or, in Barry Horstman speed, about a millisecond walk.

I know that Cranley is quoted in the streetcar article but any discussion about Cranley that is not related to his position on the streetcar project should go in the Cincinnati Mayoral Election: 2013 Thread.

 

Thanks.

 

I respectfully disagree. Cranley is now the go-to anti-streetcar voice for the media, and any discussion of the merits of his candidacy vis–à–vis the credibility of his anti-streetcar diatribe should be within the limits for discussion on this thread.

 

Cranley's position on the streetcar, his talking about the streetcar in the media, past votes on the streetcar and anything directly related to the streetcar should be in this thread. However, discussion about Cranley's development transactions in Price Hill and his ethics complaints, or where he lives belong with the other posts about the Mayoral race. This also goes for issues such as his views about public housing or his role in the 2001 race riots, both of which should not be brought up in this thread.

 

This thread has acted too long as the "catch all" thread for anything to do with Cincinnati's urban core. And while I completely recognize that there are many intertwined threads in the streetcars story, there are threads better suited on this site to discuss the overall political and ethical missteps of a MAYORAL candidate.

Of all the places I've lived and visited, I've never seen a newspaper rooting for its home city's failure the way the Enquirer does. They have absolutely no shame, and it will be a good day for Cincinnati when Gannett finally pulls the plug on that boondoggle and shuts it down completely.

Maybe it can be packed in with Door Store.

Mr. Cranely sponsored two motions in support of the streetcar when he was on council in February and March of 2008. City Council Items 200800238 & 200800316

 

 

Cranley "Streetcar going to end up like Kenwood Towne Place"

“The first rule of construction is that you don’t start a project until you have enough money to finish the project,” he said. “This is going to end up like Kenwood Towne Place.”

 

 

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2013/01/cranley-streetcar-going-to-end-up.html?ana=RSS&s=article_search&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+industry_5+%28Industry+Energy+%26+the+Environment%29

There should be a new term for those who claim to be streetcar supporters then qualify their "support" with a "but", make claims that not one but TWO votes regarding the Streetcar does not mean that people voted in favor of building the system, and/or repeat COAST/Enquirer/WLW mistruths regarding the streetcar: Streetcar Truthers.

 

Ha, good one...The reason I preface my statements is that I've seen how some people get attacked on here if they say anything even remotely against the streetcar.  I'm pretty sure you can look at my prior posts and see that I'm a big streetcar fan and I hope it gets here tomorrow....Of course I also thought my question was legitimate and you attacked me rather than try to answer it.  Thanks to ryan for attempting to answer my question though I hope his answer isn't the reason.

 

As for voting twice for the streetcar, they didn't vote twice for the streetcar.  They voted twice against an amendment that would change the city charter.  Granted, the second vote was directly tied to the streetcar unlike the first one but it still wasn't a vote for the streetcar.  Again, I know others who did not feel it was right to change the charter even though they were 100% against the streetcar.

Mr. Cranely sponsored two motions in support of the streetcar when he was on council in February and March of 2008. City Council Items 200800238 & 200800316

 

 

 

The problem with that is the 2008 part.  I can't believe this has taken that long. 

As for voting twice for the streetcar, they didn't vote twice for the streetcar.  They voted twice against an amendment that would change the city charter.  Granted, the second vote was directly tied to the streetcar unlike the first one but it still wasn't a vote for the streetcar.  Again, I know others who did not feel it was right to change the charter even though they were 100% against the streetcar.

 

The political representatives of those opposed to the streetcar chose the ballot language. You can't fault streetcar supporters with accepting the votes as affirming the streetcar when the opponents were asserting over and over throughout both campaigns (and the signature-gathering) that the proposed amendments were about the streetcar.

 

If opponents wanted to have a streetcar vote, they could have done that. That's not what they did. But their campaigns were about the streetcar, and their campaigns lost twice. At some point a functioning democracy needs to consider the issue settled. Keep in mind that pro-streetcar council majorities have been elected multiple times, with being pro-streetcar a prominent aspect of candidates' campaign platforms.

 

As for your question about ordering the streetcars, why should they not have ordered them? Wouldn't it be absurd to have the tracks finished and be waiting on the streetcars? Once the streetcar barn is built, they can sit there and wait for everything else to be done. It seems you are buying into the idea that all bets should be hedged on whether or not the line is complete, which really infers that city leaders should not be committed to its completion. Practically everyone with any say in the matter was elected on a platform stating their commitment to seeing this project completed. We need the cars. Order them when you can!

^ I'm not arguing anything in regards to the language of the ballot.  Frankly I'm glad they did it because it caused them to fail.  If it was something to the effect of should the streetcar be installed, I think it might have failed.  But that should be a decision our elected leaders make, and they made the decision to go with the streetcar, which I agree with.  I have nothing but disrespect for people like Finney, Smitherman, etc...My only point is that the voters did not specifically vote for the streetcar which is what many intentionally say on here.  If you are going to criticize the Enquirer for misrepresenting information (which is justified), then you (not you directly) should not do the same.

 

As for ordering the streetcars, I'm not sure why you are so defensive.  I'm just curious to why they ordered them now?  It could be because it saves them money to order now by getting a discount or that's how long it takes to get them on hand.  I don't know, hence the question.  If the reason is so that it ties the hands of any future elected leaders than that is a very poor decision. As to why you wouldn't want them sitting around in a garage, well that adds cost.  You don't just want a huge piece of equipment sitting unused in a garage for two plus years do you?

In the recent press releases they are talking about 1.5 years driver training.

Anybody know anything about maintenance training? Time, place, number of employees....

Will the manufacturer be providing long/short term support? Any details?

It's standard practice for transit agencies to order new vehicles years before their delivery date.  Yes, they commonly spend a year or more sitting in the maintenance garage waiting for the line to begin operation. 

 

Cranley is acting like this is a conspiracy when he's the one playing tricks. 

The trains themselves have a very long lead time, ordering them 2 years out is likely routine, as they aren't something that just rolls off an assembly line - they will be somewhat custom.  Even things like the rails themselves will have long lead times (several months) from the time an order is put in by a contractor to the time they can be delivered on site.  No part of this project is really that far from ordinary except the uninformed scrutiny it is getting from the Enquirer.

cincySAL, I thought you were inferring there was some good reason to think the city should not order the cars. I guess you sort of are, since you say having them sit around is a waste of money. (I think that depends on how the financing works -- when is the money allocated such that interest starts to accrue? When the cars are ordered or some prior date when the money is transferred to the city's hands regardless of orders?)

 

I know the cars take a long while from order to delivery, so I would speculate that ordering them now is meant to ensure everything is ready to go once the tracks are finished (whenever that is -- there seems to be uncertainty).

 

Jake's answer seems to be reasonable, as does Ram23's -- it's standard procedure. The scrutiny is the unique thing.

 

>As such, can someone explain why the streetcars are being ordered 2+ years prior to the expected opening?  Does it take that long to get them in?

 

Yes, they take a long time to build AND there are tons of orders for them coming from cities all around the United States, although Toronto alone has orders out for more than 100. 

 

 

Exactly. There are so many new-start streetcar orders out there -- even among multiple suppliers -- that it will take a while before manufacturers can get to Cincinnati's order.

On the lead time for ordering streetcars, Cincinnati did the right thing. I'm sure other cities wish they had done this.

 

Be mindful that these cars have to be made in America. So forget a whole bunch of European manufacturers. And Bombardier, which is selling 400 or so streetcars to Toronto.

 

Portland ordered streetcars from United Streetcar for its expansion across the Willamette River several years ago, and they don't have them yet. So Portland is now operating the recent extension using its existing (smaller) fleet, with no spares. Headways have gone to 16-18 minutes at peak from 10 minutes or less before. Tucson's order is behind Portland's, and so is Washington D.C.'s. We would have been behind them. Plus they may have been the most expensive. I know D.C. is paying considerably more than we are.

 

So, OK, forget United Streetcar - we could have ordered streetcars from Siemens, which would have been a no-problems transaction from a highly-qualified manufacturer, and Siemens was heavily favored for the Cincinnati order at one point. But because the Siemens streetcar is really a slimmed-down LRT vehicle, it seemed over-sized for Cincinnati's narrow streets. Plus, there was a question whether the heavier Siemens cars could make it up Vine Street hill. Our hills are a problem. The people at United Streetcar told me they examined all the potential routes being studied in all the fitty or so wannabe streetcar cities. You know what the steepest grade is in all of those cities? Clifton Avenue. And the second steeepest? Vine Street.

 

The wireless Kinkosharyo cars may not have had the off-wire range needed for Cincinnati. I don't think any other city has bought these yet. Do we want to be first with an unproven technology?

 

OK, so now we're down to Brookville and CAF. Brookville has never built a modern streetcar, although it has built quality replica trolleys. I wasn't crazy about the appearance of its modern streetcar. They were competitive on price, but maybe city administrators didn't want to be the alpha city for Brookville either.

 

So, CAF, which has Cincinnati's streetcar operating in Europe right now. And it's a well-known manufacturer of light rail and subway vehicles operating throughout North America, South America and Europe. So it seems like a safe bet to me. And it was cheapest.

 

Had Cincinnati screwed-around and delayed its order until all the unknowns are resolved, another city with a streetcar project -- Fort Lauderdale, Detroit, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Los Angeles, West Sacramento, San Antonio, Oklahoma City, Kansas City, Arlington come to mind -- could have moved in front of Cincinnati's order and captured our "first in North America" launch price offered by CAF, and we might have had to wait several years for the vehicles, I dunno. Then the John Cranleys of the world would have been screaming, "Why didn't you guys plan better?"

 

So that's why the city is doing what it's doing.

 

By the way, a well-connected Cincinnatian said this to me today about our upcoming mayoral election: We have a 35 year-old who thinks like a 60 year-old running against a 60 year-old who thinks like a 35 year-old. I think that's a perfect description of Cranley v. Qualls. Make it viral.

 

Happy New Year, everyone.

TOAST tweeted something about Mallory not being able to see the first streetcar ride since he won't be in office.  It's important because its the first time TOAST has admitted the streetcar will be built in their tweets

It's my position that the Cincinnati Streetcar is more of a Symbol than a transportation improvement.

 

I actually spent two solid days writing the post at the link below. Do please read it before responding since my position is a lot more complex than the slightly intriguing statement that is this thread's title.

http://cincymap.org/blog/the-streetcar-4-symbolic-transit/

 

I'd love to start a good discussion here. I'm dying to be proven wrong! Or at least to come to a new understanding of how this project won't put Cincinnati's transit in a slightly pathetic light for the next couple of decades.

 

Best,

Nate

 

P.S. Mods, I put this here rather than in the streetcar thread because it's not news. I think it's time we did some serious re-analysis of the project, and not the kind that's fueled by the basic, low-level argument that the two ballot initiatives instigated. Edit: Or merely dabbling in the details of implementation.

bike756, we give this thread wide latitude here to discuss all things pertaining to the Cincinnati Streetcar. It's probably why this was the first thread at UO to get 1 million reads. Your post belongs here.

bike756,

 

I disagree. It connects a ton of amenities with rail transit, which is preferable by choice riders to bus transit. It is a huge compliment to the walkability of the basin. When extended Uptown it will be a huge compliment to the bikeability of the urban core. (Walk bike on, walk bike off...unlike buses which may even have full racks.)

 

I realize it's not ideal because the route meanders, but it connects a lot of dots with only one major blip in the path (around Central Parkway). You can complain about the oneway streets, but a) buses are also subject to them, and b) if you are not on a tight schedule or you are mobility-impaired, you can just ride the thing around the top or bottom of the loop anyway. For people looking to retire and grow old downtown it would be a godsend. For tourists it's an easy-to-read way of seeing a large portion of the sights.

 

Your view of rail's impermanence is way off-base. There are a ton of abandoned tracks, but those tracks were only abandoned over a long stretch of time. Developers are only concerned with the time period in which it takes them to turn a profit. The chances of newly laid tracks being abandoned in that time window are very, very low. Even if you personally disagree, I think you would be in a small minority and the perception of investors, not you, is what counts.

 

To be honest, I'm not super knowledgeable about the whole story regarding the Cincy streetcar, but it is fascinating to watch this whole streetcar process unfold, and I can't help but notice many parallels to the many fights over the years regarding the subway.

To be honest, I'm not super knowledgeable about the whole story regarding the Cincy streetcar, but it is fascinating to watch this whole streetcar process unfold, and I can't help but notice many parallels to the many fights over the years regarding the subway.

 

Precisely which "fights" over which "subway" and in what "years" do you refer to?

I am not very familiar with these things, and a lot of this is industry or legal mumbo jumbo to me. However, the way I read it:

 

PUCO has rejected Duke's proposal to have the city pay for the streetcar or (alternatively) charge city residents a fee for utility relocation.

 

I don't know if Duke can just submit another plan, addressing PUCO's concerns, or if this is the final word for Duke's liability for relocation with regards to this project. Either way, it is good news.

 

You can read the list of reasons PUCO rejected the proposal here:

 

http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/119004561?access_key=key-prjvl6aa5yl6pt4au66

Bottom of page 32 of the PDF; page 21 of the document.

 

Funny how one of PUCO's complaints is that the proposal is too broad -- that they might use the rider to escape liability for many different sorts of transit projects since the term is ambiguous. (Remind anyone of other streetcar opponents' also-failed tactics?)

 

Possible expansion of a transit system outside municipal boundaries is another concern they address -- why would Cincinnati residents cover the tab for a system extending outside the borders? Duke's proposal might wind up with this happening.

 

They also bring up economic, social, and environmental benefits of projects which can extend beyond borders. It seems to me this could be the nail in the coffin for any fix Duke might add to their language, and I find it very encouraging that PUCO included it in their review. It's really a trump card against the whole concept of concentrating the cost burden (in this case on Cincinnatians). It's progressive thinking (from PUCO???), and it's the argument I think people on UrbanOhio would be most likely to use.

 

Interested to hear from anyone who understands where things go from here, or who can interpret the document better than me. Also interested to hear from Eight and State.

From a circa 2007 Cranley bio:

 

Cranley has also led efforts to redevelop the urban core by creating tax increment financing districts. He has also worked to expand and keep affordable public transit and to pass a clean air law. During his tenure, Cranley has been the most outspoken and effective leader in getting more cops hired and on the street to fight crime.

 

 

Does anyone know what this is in reference to?

 

Here is the link:

http://www.smartvoter.org/2007/11/06/oh/hm/vote/cranley_j/bio.html