Indeed the current economic crisis and related bankruptcy of government has brought a lot of so-called fiscal conservatives into the forefront.  However, what today's crop of anti-spending politicians forget (whether intentionally or not) is that you have to spend money to make money.  Cutting fat and pork is a good thing, but canceling projects that have a demonstrably positive return on investment is idiotic. 

 

All spending is not bad, and now is the time to spend that money, even if it's deficit spending, on infrastructure projects that create jobs and will benefit the public purse in the future.  Construction workers need jobs, cities need investments, and the labor and material are cheap right now, as is the interest rate on borrowed money.  Anyone who suggests that building the Cincinnati streetcar, or the 3-C Corridor, or the New Jersey ARC Tunnel, should be canceled or suspended is only playing political games so they can say "look I cut spending!" even though it's at the expense of the future of our country.

^ Well said!

Indeed the current economic crisis and related bankruptcy of government has brought a lot of so-called fiscal conservatives into the forefront. However, what today's crop of anti-spending politicians forget (whether intentionally or not) is that you have to spend money to make money. Cutting fat and pork is a good thing, but canceling projects that have a demonstrably positive return on investment is idiotic.

 

All spending is not bad, and now is the time to spend that money, even if it's deficit spending, on infrastructure projects that create jobs and will benefit the public purse in the future. Construction workers need jobs, cities need investments, and the labor and material are cheap right now, as is the interest rate on borrowed money. Anyone who suggests that building the Cincinnati streetcar, or the 3-C Corridor, or the New Jersey ARC Tunnel, should be canceled or suspended is only playing political games so they can say "look I cut spending!" even though it's at the expense of the future of our country.

 

Nailed it !

 

  "A demonstrably positive return on investment..."

 

    The streetcar project is not guaranteed to be a success. It is very well possible that if it is built, it attracts only a modest ridership, and never gets extended to uptown. On the other hand, it could be a fantastic success.

 

    It is said that borrowing money makes a good business better, but it makes a bad business worse. In the event that the project get built but it does NOT attract new development, then the City of Cincinnati will have more infrastructure to maintain.

 

    The trends in Cincinnati are not good; transit ridership is down, even though it is up in most parts of the country.

 

    The good news is that Over-the-Rhine is finally starting to look up, after so many years of neglect. Is this the start of something new, or too little too late? I don't know.

 

  As for "demonstrably positive," I'm not sure how one would demonstrate it other than actually building it. Sure, the streetcars have done allright in Portland, but Portland has done allright anyway. Portland also has an urban boundary policy, which tends to focus development on the core, as well as a high amount of foreign immigration. By contrast, Cincinnati, at least on a metro level, has a suburban expansion policy.

 

    Plus, you can't really make a fair demonstration of any system built in the 1990's. The 1990's were boom times for residential developers, whether it be suburban subdivisions or urban infill. Today, there is an awful lot of vacant property across the board.

 

    Please don't get too excited about the issue of manholes being 10' from the centerline. This is one of many details that is supposed to be worked out during design. I am confident that some clever engineer can find a solution. I am less confident that the clever engineer will have the proper support from politicians. 90% of so-called engineering failures are not technical in nature, but are the result of human factors such as miscommunication.

 

    "Cincinnati is not some distant world..."

 

    No, but Cincinnati truely is different. There was once a time when city governments were more important than state governments. Cincinnati used to have it's own building code, and it's own way of doing things. In time, states developed statewide building codes, and even groups of states banded together to enact common policies. While Cincinnati has succombed to some of this, Cincinnati still remains fiercely independent. Why, Cincinnati still uses the "City supplement" to O.D.O.T. specifications for highway work. At least Cincinnati isn't as territorial as Philidelphia, which uses a different length of foot as a unit of measure than everyone else. (100 feet in Philidelphia is the same length as 100 feet, 4 inches everywhere else.)

 

    I hope for the best, but I find it hard to get too optimistic about the streetcar.

^ I really wish you wouldn't indent like that; it makes reading your posts a bit of a chore.

 

"The good news is that Over-the-Rhine is finally starting to look up, after so many years of neglect. Is this the start of something new, or too little too late? I don't know."

 

We need to take bold steps to ensure it is not "too little, too late". Cincinnati will not reach its potential without taking bold steps. As far as risks go, the streetcar is pretty low-risk. The model has proven a success everywhere it's been implemented. If you accept that "business as usual" is not a recipe for success, then the streetcar project is a very easy one to support.

 

The saying goes: "Better to have tried and failed than never to have tried at all." You yourself acknowledge that we are around the point of "too late". We must try.

Furthermore, there is a fear of the unknown in Cincinnati. Portland has a lot of experience with rail transit. Cincinnati does not (as least not in the last 50 years.) It is going to be more difficult to build a new streetcar in Cincinnati than it will to build the same streetcar in Portland just because of the lack of experience. No local contractor in Cincinnati has ever built a streetcar.

 

Portland has a lot of experience with rail transit now, but only because they took their first steps in the mid-80s.  When they started looking into streetcars in the early 90s, they had only had a light rail system running for about 5 years.  Honestly, I'm not sure what difference it makes anyway.  Cincinnati doesn't have rail now; that's a mistake.  You can't get experience without actually having it, so all you can do is study other cities, see what works, and hope for the best.  But the key is that you have to start somewhere.  Cincinnati is starting with a streetcar, and that's fine by me.

 

 

The trends in Cincinnati are not good; transit ridership is down, even though it is up in most parts of the country.

 

That's mainly because our transit system is a joke.  We have 2 bus systems for a region that needs 1.  Metro is funded by the city, but is made to serve the entire county.  Neither systems' routes make much sense.  Neither system uses modern transit technology like farecards and smart phone apps.  Oh, and there is zero rail, so even if you do want to take mass transit, you're just as likely to get stuck in the same traffic as everybody else.  Start building rail, unify the bus systems, rework the routes, and bring the tech forward 20 years.  Then you'll see people riding transit here.  As it stands, our current system is more of a hassle than anything else.

>Portland also has an urban boundary policy, which tends to focus development on the core,

 

Portland's urban growth boundary is intended to preserve countryside and discourage suburban sprawl.  It has nothing whatsoever to do with the center of the city, where the streetcar was built ten years ago through an empty industrial area.  The streetcar made those areas much more attractive to potential residents both functionally and economically than they would have been otherwise. 

 

>There was once a time when city governments were more important than state governments.

 

Yes and no.  The State of Ohio interfered with Cincinnati's development in several significant ways in the late 1800's and early 1900's.  Although Ohio permitted the canal it built and owned to be leased for construction of a rapid transit line, it also prohibited Cincinnati from raising taxed to pay for its construction or operation.  It dictated the character of the line, forcing subway construction farther north than was technically necessary.  Its Supreme Court declared the subway's lease to the Cincinnati Street Railway invalid in 1917, removing the private financing element of the plan.  Then it took the right-of-way back in the 1950's, after signaling its intention to do so in 1929 by dropping its lease from $32,000 a year to a token $100 payment. 

 

 

That's mainly because our transit system is a joke. We have 2 bus systems for a region that needs 1.

 

I'm glad others feel this way. I take TANK every day to get to school, but that's about it. It serves me hardly any benefit to go anywhere else when I need to get downtown or further. Metro and Tank being two separate entities really sucks. I like in NKY and my roommate and I often carpool when we work the same shifts. One night he drove us home after we both had driven in the morning, he had a family emergency and I was stranded at the apartment the next day. I tried to plan out taking TANK downtown then hoping on Metro, the whole process would've had so many "layovers" and downtime that it was ridiculous. TANK operates a fine system here in Northern Kentucky and METRO is slowly getting better, but damn I'd love to see these two systems unified.

 

   Portland also has an urban boundary policy, which tends to focus development on the core ...

 

 

One more time: The City of Cincinnati, which has no urban growth bounday, is almost exactly equal in populaton density to the City of Portland, which has an UGB in its region. So why does the absence of an UGB matter as a predictor of the success of the Cincinnati Streetcar?

As for "demonstrably positive," I'm not sure how one would demonstrate it other than actually building it.

 

Exactly! Good thing we're building it.

Can anyone tell me what the position of the Hamilton County Commissioners is on the streetcar? Thanks.

Pretty sure Portune is supportive.

 

Todd Portune has never been a supporter of streetcars or electric light rail. He's been an out-and-out opponent of the latter.

thanks for the clarification

"So why does the absence of an UGB matter as a predictor of the success of the Cincinnati Streetcar?"

 

The bottom line is that the Cincinnati core is becoming less dense. The City of Cincinnati had a population of ~500,000 in 1955 and has ~300,000 today, a loss of ~200,000 or 40%.

 

How much of that population movement can be attributed to government policies such as zoning, highway construction, UGB, etc. is debatable, but it is undeniable that government policies at all levels in the Cincinnati area favor development in the suburbs rather than the core.

 

Yes, the streetcar is an effort to turn that trend around, but if OKI funds ten highway projects in the suburbs for every one project that Cincinnati funds in the core, then Cincinnati is fighting a losing battle.

 

Portland's population is growing at 7%. Cincinnati's is growing at 0.5%. (City-data.com.) That difference is HUGE! Now I know some of the streetcar proponents think that this growth rate is DUE to the streetcar, but I suspect that Portland would have sustained most of this growth without a streetcar.

 

Portland is able to grow mainly with foreign immigration, which Cincinnati lacks.

 

So, in my humble opinion, the absolute density figure is not as important as whether that figure is rising or declining. 

^ The City of Portland's population is not growing at 7%. The 2010 Census will confirm that.

Eighth and State, every couple of weeks it seems like you have found the key reason why the streetcar shouldn't/won't get built, or why it won't work if it's built here.  I'm curious, what do you suggest Cincinnati do to revitalize and repopulate its core? 

 

I'd be curious to actually see the immigration numbers for Portland, because it doesn't strike me as much of an immigrant haven.  The West Coast centers for foriegn immigration are LA, Bay Area, and Seattle, (Vancouver as well, but since it's not the US I'm not sure if it should be included).  Immigrants can help grow the population and bring diversity and life to areas, as the immigrant communities have certainly helped make LA what it is today.  However, immigration does not always equal a road map to success.  Detroit has one of the highest levels of foriegn immigration from the Middle East, yet it is hardly an example of a success story.  At the same time, Pittsburgh, which is often used as the poster child city for post Rust Belt life, has one of the lowest immigration rate of major metros in the US. 

 

Instead of cherry picking reasons why the streetcar won't work, why don't you acknowlege the reasons why it can and will work.  OTR is rehabbing quickly with the help of 3CDC, and I think that would continue with or without the streetcar, but you have to think that the streetcar connecting OTR to the wealth of jobs and attractions in both downtown and uptown will only make the area that much more appealing.  Even if you throw the multiple studies out the window, an objective look at the streetcar project should be convincing.

I'm not sure what the alternative is--don't try new and different projects like the streetcar, keep doing the same things we have been doing, and just cross our fingers that the urban core improves? 

Portland is growing because people from Ohio leave to move there. Ask a native Portlander what they think of the Midwestern horde that has filled the city. Same thing is going on in Brooklyn.

^funny you say Midwesterners are moving to Brooklyn.  I have 2 new neighbors in OTR who are from Brooklyn!  While they can drone-on about how great NYC is, they also love OTR.

I just went through a box of photos I took in the late 90's.  The Emery Building, Power Building, Krippendorf, American Buidling, and McAlpin's were all vacant and looked bad. Shillito's was vacant too for about two years.  It took relatively few people to move in and bring those five big buildings back to life, probably less than 1,000.

 

I don't know how many people have moved into 3CDC units in Over-the-Rhine, but I'm sure it's still well under 500. So Eight & State seems to think we need hundreds of thousands of people to revitalize downtown and OTR.  The real answer is that the tipping point is very close, maybe under 1,000 people, because at that point downtown and OTR becomes much more of a destination for the whole city and will attract much more people to restaurants and entertainment. 

 

 

 

I just went through a box of photos I took in the late 90's. The Emery Building, Power Building, Krippendorf, American Buidling, and McAlpin's were all vacant and looked bad. Shillito's was vacant too for about two years. It took relatively few people to move in and bring those five big buildings back to life, probably less than 1,000.

 

I don't know how many people have moved into 3CDC units in Over-the-Rhine, but I'm sure it's still well under 500. So Eight & State seems to think we need hundreds of thousands of people to revitalize downtown and OTR. The real answer is that the tipping point is very close, maybe under 1,000 people, because at that point downtown and OTR becomes much more of a destination for the whole city and will attract much more people to restaurants and entertainment.

 

 

And remember there are people like me who are watching this project from other states, patiently waiting for rails to get put in the ground to move.  I now have a boyfriend who's on board. 

 

So...if there is a streetcar under construction by summer 2011, Over-the-Rhine will gain two people from Wisconsin.  If a streetcar isn't under construction by summer 2011, Minneapolis will gain two people from Wisconsin.  It's as simple as that.

 

Trust me, I'm not the only one.

AJ, glad I was able to give Tim the dramatic contrast of Indy to Cincy to persuade him on how great the Nati is.  Nothing like seeing Indy before Cincy to realize how great Cincy really is.  :-)

AJ, glad I was able to give Tim the dramatic contrast of Indy to Cincy to persuade him on how great the Nati is. Nothing like seeing Indy before Cincy to realize how great Cincy really is.   :-)

 

Lol, I was really glad that worked out too.  You can ask Chris (ColDay***) about Tim's reactions to Indy.  He wouldn't shut up about how little there is in that city.  Cincinnati's got so many layers it's insane.  I've been pouring my soul into Cincy for 5 years now and I still find new stuff out all the time. 

 

BUT...I will never own a car, so if Cincinnati doesn't start showing that it's improving its transit system (by building a streetcar) then I'll be forced to abandon that for the ever boring, yet progressive, Minneapolis.

 

  "What do you suggest Cincinnati do to revitalize and repopulate its core?"

 

    I have stated these things in the past on this very forum, but since you asked,

 

    To revitalize the core, Cincinnati needs to stop subdizing sprawl on the periphery, overhaul the Queen City Metro routes and fares, address the drug / crime / poor school problem, reduce taxes, address public housing, etc.

 

    I realize that Cincinnati suffers from the same problems as every other American city, and that some of these things are out of Cincinnati's direct control. For example, immigration policy is a federal policy, and Cincinnati has no control over it other than the fact that the Cincinnati area has a couple members of the House of Representatives.

 

    On the other hand, there is a lot that Cincinnati DOES control. Yet, Cincinnati often does the WRONG thing. For example, Cincinnati Water Works continues to expand service well outside of the core. Cincinnati has a controlling interest in Queen City Metro yet continues to run a poor service (No offense to the Queen City Metro workers.) Cincinnati has lots of programs targeted toward low income people, which are well-intentioned, but not good for business. Cincinnati's high taxes drive businesses away.

 

    I see the Streetcar as a pet project. While there's nothing necessariy wrong with a pet project, it doesn't necessarily make business sense, either. I have my doubts as to whether the streetcar is going to make such a big difference as it is given credit for. Sure, a few urban fans will move to OTR because of the streetcar. But in the meantime, how many residents will Cincinnati lose in other areas?

 

    "Every couple of weeks it seems like you have found the key reason..."

 

    Just trying to keep the forum interesting.  :-)

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

 

^ can you tell me which parts of the city of Cincinnati you consider suburbs that are being subsidized for their sprawl... since it's kind of debatable. 

This belongs in another thread, but...

 

    To revitalize the core, Cincinnati needs to [...] address public housing,

 

For what is "address public housing" code?  Everyone who wants something to change wants to address...the way you want to address it is the important part.

 

I see the Streetcar as a pet project. While there's nothing necessariy wrong with a pet project, it doesn't necessarily make business sense, either. I have my doubts as to whether the streetcar is going to make such a big difference as it is given credit for. Sure, a few urban fans will move to OTR because of the streetcar. But in the meantime, how many residents will Cincinnati lose in other areas?

 

Here are several hundred pages of studies and reports explaining why the streetcar is a good investment for the City of Cincinnati

 

http://cincystreetcar.wordpress.com/2010/09/09/studies-and-reports-on-the-cincinnati-streetcar/

 

  "What do you suggest Cincinnati do to revitalize and repopulate its core?"

 

I have stated these things in the past on this very forum, but since you asked,

 

To revitalize the core, Cincinnati needs to stop subdizing sprawl on the periphery, overhaul the Queen City Metro routes and fares, address the drug / crime / poor school problem, reduce taxes, address public housing, etc.

 

 

Essentially none of those issues you bring up involve Capital Funding.

 

If we didn't build the streetcar, we would only free up capital funding which could only be used to possibly to "address public housing" but I'm not sure what exactly "addressing public housing" means.

 

  "Can you tell me which parts of the city of Cincinnati you consider suburbs that are being subsidized for their sprawl"

 

    By definition, any part that consumes more resources than it contributes.

 

    It is difficult to untangle all of the interactions between government agencies and utilities, but I think anyone on this board is smart enough to tell the difference by looking. An occupied 3 story house on a 25 foot wide lot on a narrow street probably pays for it's own infrastructure in property taxes and utility fees. A McMansion on a 100 foot wide street uses 4 times the infrastructure but doesn't contribute 4 times the cost. A vacant lot contributes nothing. Subsidized housing contributes nothing and draws even more services from the city.

 

    A lot of this sprawl is outside of the incorporated boundary of Cincinnati but Cincinnati still contributes resources in the form of sewer and water lines, police protection and fire protection, parks, Metro bus service, and so on.

 

   

 

 

 

 

  "Here are several hundred pages of studies and reports..."

 

  I appreciate the information, and there is a lot of good data and opinion in those reports.

 

  However, it must be remembered that reports by consultants usually favor the concept proposed by the owner. No consultant is going to say, "Sorry, the numbers don't show a good case for your project" and stay in business. It all comes back to the assumptions used in the study.

 

    The projected ridership for the streetcar is quite frankly mediocre, at least at first. To get the full benefit, OTR needs to be redeveloped. A streetcar alone isn't going to redevelop OTR. We also need a strong local economy.

 

    Building the streetcar AND following policies that promote a strong local economy might succeed in Over-the-Rhine. However, at the same time that the City Manager is promoting the streetcar, there is also talk about raising taxes to cover city pensions. These two movements are in opposition to eacy other. Tax reform in my opinion is just as important or more important to local business than the streetcar. However, tax reform doesn't get much media attention, because you can't take a photo of it.

 

    I don't think that development in OTR is limited by lack of a streetcar at this time. I wish Thomas and others could devote as much energy to other reforms.

 

 

 

  "I'm not sure what exactly "addressing public housing" means."

 

  Do away with it! Public housing is a drain on the local economy. This is a topic for another thread, though.

To revitalize the core, Cincinnati needs to stop subdizing sprawl on the periphery, overhaul the Queen City Metro routes and fares, address the drug / crime / poor school problem, reduce taxes, address public housing, etc.

how?

Drug prohibition is a federal issue - the city's / state's hands are tied.

School?  Crime? Do you think the that's the government's problem? And that it can fix it with less means?

liberals.....

^ Couple of thoughts:

 

I don't think OTR development south of, say, 13th Street is limited by the absence of the streetcar, but the land north of there is. It's just too far to walk to work in the CBD, and who wants to get in a car to commute less than a mile and then pay for downtown parking? Kind of defies part of the logic of living downtown. And all of OTR is not walkable to Uptown or internally walkable from one end to another. I do it all the time, but few people are willing to do so.

 

On the consultants, I've known the economists at HDR Decision Economics for a decade, and they have been advising OKI and the City on transportation projects over that period. When they were giving advice on the I-71 light rail project, someone asked if they had ever recommended against a rail project, and they named a few. Plus, they advised on the I-75 Corridor improvements, and they concluded that widening the highway was a better short-term solution than light rail, largely because of the growth in freight traffic which isn't going to get on the train. Longer-term, they said LRT is needed, that the highway will eventually max-out even with the lane widenings being undertaken now.

 

I know they also advise the Arizona and Washington DOT's on right-of-way and bridge issues, so they're hardly a bunch of trolley jollies. They advise FedEx and another household-name, worldwide corporation that I am forbidden to name which called me once to get a confidential assessment of HDR's abilities.

  The projected ridership for the streetcar is quite frankly mediocre, at least at first. To get the full benefit, OTR needs to be redeveloped. A streetcar alone isn't going to redevelop OTR. We also need a strong local economy.

 

Portland doesn't have a strong local economy, in fact Portland doesn't have enough jobs to support its boom in population.  People are moving there for the lifestyle not for the jobs, and there have even been reports of people moving back due to not getting jobs.

 

Cincinnati really needs all it can get to attract people, because Cincinnati has a very solid economic base that actually Portland lacks.  If Cincy can attract outside attention it will draw people and new money to the city.  I think the streetcar coupled with outside development, combined with agressive pro restoration/promotion of heritage tourism policies can help this.

 

Really Portland has no base and is doing more with less.  Cincinnati has a ton of assets locally and is doing very little to grow them.

The projected ridership for the streetcar is quite frankly mediocre, at least at first. To get the full benefit, OTR needs to be redeveloped. A streetcar alone isn't going to redevelop OTR. We also need a strong local economy.

 

The streetcar isn't the only sollution to redevelop OTR, but its a damn good start. In Portland they built theirs through an abandoned industrial area that is now full of afordable housing, entertainment, shopping and restaurants. In multiple other cities we've seen how permanent rails in the ground attract busineesses and promote development. I'm not sure the last time you went down to OTR was, but I was just down there tonight explaining to a friend how great it is. (Highly, highly recommend Joe's Diner by the way to anyone reading this), but that I wouldn't go north of Liberty. Since the riots, OTR has turned around quite well, the streetcar will serve as a continued catalyst and help speed that up. Instead of upper scale condos, we'll see more affordable housing opportunities that cater to college students and young people just joining the work force and the area is ripe for that kind of development.

 

I'm not sure what you're getting at by wanting to re-tool the Metro routes. In my opinion, they're pretty good. Seems like you're just trying to create more and more reasoning to try and convince yourself why you dislike the streetcar project. METRO's problem is how hard it is for a newcomer or out of towner to navigate. They're slowly getting better though.

 

Look, the streetcar is happening. Instead of vast sewer conspiracies and continuing to look at the past at what we could've done, lets look at the opportunity we have now - the streetcar to strengthen our downtown. More businesses, more people = stronger economy. It's worked elsewhere, its already working here.

 

In case you missed tonights episode of South Park, it featured a hero named "Captain Hindsight." Your posts really remind me of him.

 

  This is what I mean by re-tooling the Metro routes. Some routes, or portions of routes, are running empty buses or nearly empty buses. Some other routes are overloaded.

 

  From my own experience, some routes way out in the suburbs are underutilized. This make sense, for after all, who wants to take a 40 minute ride and sit through 30 stops while it takes 20 minutes to drive?

 

    On the other hand, some routes in the city are overcrowded. I've seen the 17 turn away riders at Clifton and Ludlow because there was no room for more passengers.

 

    The solution is obviously to shorten the suburban routes and double up on the urban routes.

 

    Another thing that can be adjusted is the fares. If the bus is crowded, the fares should be raised.

 

    The good workers at Queen City Metro understand these things, but they don't implement changes due to political reasons. From a cursory knowledge of their overall routes and schedules, it seems that their goal is to maximize coverage within the city. A planner at Metro told me that Metro paid someone to follow a bus in a car, and only one passenger rode the bus on the entire route. Yet when Metro tried to cut that bus route, that one passenger rose such a fuss that City Council (who doesn't control the bus company directly but has a major influence) refused to cancel the service. Whoever funds the system gets to call the shots.

 

    It is said that no municipal bus service in the country turns a profit, but even so, Queen City Metro should try to get closer to being profitable. It does not benefit anyone to drive empty buses around.

 

    Sadly, I don't have a whole lot of confidence in the City being able to make a business decision.

 

  "Look, the streetcar is happening."

 

    I'm not trying to stop it.    :-)

   

Cincinnati need to be progressive. The streetcar shows that it's being progressive. Where has being conservative gotten Cincy so far? Oh 60 million dollar deficit.

Horstman comes out swinging again...Surprise surprise.

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20101028/NEWS0108/10290338/Lawyer-wants-ethics-action-on-Bortz

 

"Accusing Cincinnati City Councilman Chris Bortz of ignoring advice from the Ohio Ethics Commission to avoid involvement in discussions on the $128 million streetcar project, a local lawyer wants the state panel to remove Bortz from office.

 

 

 

In a three-page letter supported by transcripts and videotapes of recent council sessions, lawyer Tim Mara argues that Bortz's actions at those meetings demonstrate that "advice, warnings, admonitions, directives and public outcry about his conduct are ineffective" in keeping him on the sidelines in discussion over the city's streetcar project...."

Blah Blah Blah.

 

Did anyone else see the Enquirer article where they listed the top 10 property owners along the Streetcar line?  Towne Properties didn't even make it in the top 10... and number 10 was something similar to "5 properties".  This whole thing is a joke.  If I were Bortz I would have demanded actual guidelines.  ie. how far away his properties have to be (blocks) how many is the max a company can have, etc.  There is no way they would have agreed on specific numbers... This is like Park51 debate in Manhattan... people say the Islamic community center is too close... but no one actually says what distance is ok...

^I'm not sure that there are any specific guidelines for this.  At least not down to the level of "how many blocks", "how many properties", etc.  It's just that he could benefit.  If he lived in a nearby condo the might go up in value, same story.  That's why I thought the Ethics Commission's stance was ridiculous.  It essentially says that people invested in a region cannot make any decisions that would benefit said region.  But isn't that the point of city government?  To elect citizens that try to make the city better?

^ exactly.  If I own a restaurant two blocks from the line can I not vote?  If Towne Properties was owned by his uncle instead of his father would that make it different?  (these are supposed to be annoying/unanswerable questions)

 

The other thing that's so stupid about Mara (and to an extent Hortsman for being so one-sided in his reporting) is that even though he didn't vote on the issues and abstained, they are now arguing that by even participating in the discussion (which he could have done as a private citizen I suppose...) he should be removed from office!??  that's absurd.  These people are nuts.

Well the whole central issue is that on one hand they claim the streetcar won't improve property values, but then at the same time rich people are getting it built to enhance their property values. 

 

It's like how the Enquirer was incapable of recognizing the absurdity of the Issue 8/Issue 9 thing.  With Issue 9, it was all about how bad government is, but Issue 8 was all about how important government is to keeping a healthy water supply.  The same losers were behind both. 

 

 

Well, this pretty much explains the Enquirer's constant slant against the streetcar and other progressive projects...

This is how they vote:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20101030/EDIT03/10310345

Well, this pretty much explains the Enquirer's constant slant against the streetcar and other progressive projects...

This is how they vote:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20101030/EDIT03/10310345

 

I voted pretty similarly, and I campaigned for the streetcar.

^^ Really, wow.  (Only surprised because Kaisch seems against transportation alternatives or gov projects, and Monzel is straight gunning to stop the Streetcar)

 

On a different note that is a straight GOP ticket minus Cordary and Pepper. (and Pepper is a local boy with a Cincy family name so that pick is to be expected of the Enquirer)

Well, this pretty much explains the Enquirer's constant slant against the streetcar and other progressive projects...

This is how they vote:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20101030/EDIT03/10310345

 

I voted pretty similarly, and I campaigned for the streetcar.

 

Something about being the exception, not the rule, comes to mind....

Well, this pretty much explains the Enquirer's constant slant against the streetcar and other progressive projects...

This is how they vote:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20101030/EDIT03/10310345

 

I voted pretty similarly, and I campaigned for the streetcar.

 

Hmm- Considering Chabot said he would never seek federal support for the streetcar, Monzel is completely against it, and Kasich said the state would not support it (ie. no applications for federal grants) I'm guessing you meant you supported everyone other than these guys?

 

Well, this pretty much explains the Enquirer's constant slant against the streetcar and other progressive projects...

This is how they vote:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20101030/EDIT03/10310345

 

I voted pretty similarly, and I campaigned for the streetcar.

 

Something about being the exception, not the rule, comes to mind....

 

No, something about correlation not causation perhaps does?

 

Well, this pretty much explains the Enquirer's constant slant against the streetcar and other progressive projects...

This is how they vote:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20101030/EDIT03/10310345

 

I voted pretty similarly, and I campaigned for the streetcar.

 

Hmm- Considering Chabot said he would never seek federal support for the streetcar, Monzel is completely against it, and Kasich said the state would not support it (ie. no applications for federal grants) I'm guessing you meant you supported everyone other than these guys?

 

 

Despite being a strong supporter of the streetcar, I try not to let one thing dominate my decision making process.  None of those guys can stop the progress on the streetcar, anyway.

Knock it off with the personal political affiliations attacks please. We should not be confusing someones personal reasoning with political party platforms.

 

Thank you!

 

Sorry to start up political arguments, just thought it was interesting to see who the enquirer is batting for. 

Anyway, with the newly elected, GOP dominant, state and federal governments, does anyone forsee any problems with getting the streetcar started and finished?  Could this affect TIGER grants or other state/fed dollars we still need? 

What power does Monzel now have to complicate things?  (Sorry, but I'm ignorant as to what the county com. actually does)

likely it wont get any endorsements for more federal or state funds, likely meaning the city will have to close the 12 million dollar gap via alternative financing (bonds, casino revenue etc) as well as swallowing the total 64M in potential bonds that were leveraged in an effort to show government officials the city was serious about the project.