Grrrr.... ;-) I wish I were more in the know!!! PM me if you don't want the info public, but can still share.

Do this instead. Tell Kasich how to make Ohio cool -- by not giving back federal money for trains and transit:

 

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2011/04/13/kasich-we-have-to-make-ohio-cool/

Give Cincinnati back the $52 million. That would be REALLY cool.

Do this instead. Tell Kasich how to make Ohio cool -- by not giving back federal money for trains and transit:

 

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2011/04/13/kasich-we-have-to-make-ohio-cool/

 

In case you guys haven't noticed, #ThingsJohnKasichFindsCool is absolutely hilarious on twitter right now

Do this instead. Tell Kasich how to make Ohio cool -- by not giving back federal money for trains and transit:

 

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2011/04/13/kasich-we-have-to-make-ohio-cool/

 

In case you guys haven't noticed, #ThingsJohnKasichFindsCool is absolutely hilarious on twitter right now

 

That hash tag is a thing of beauty.

- Kasich was unapologetic about the yanking of $51.8 million in state funding for Cincinnati’s proposed streetcar from Downtown to the Uptown area – a move that was a serious setback to the plan.  When it was suggested that many of the young professionals who live downtown and along the proposed streetcar route – the kind of young people Kasich said he wants to keep in Ohio – support the project, the governor said the project does not make economic sense. “It would soak up all our new capital improvement dollars; and there is nothing to indicate that spending money on that is going to create something cool….having a streetcar is not going to prevent them (young people) from getting out of town.”

 

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2011/04/14/kasich-haley-barbour-for-president/

I love how there's never any money for rail, but there's always money for more new highways and bridges. Even when we flat out don't have the money to even maintain what we've got.  Must be a lot of cash growing on all of those decorative trees next to those off ramps that the DOT plants. It all pays for itself, I'm sure.

 

I'm always dumbfounded by people not being able to put two and two together. In cities nationwide, there was serious decline just about everywhere the streetcars were removed. Whether they were functional working class areas or high-end playgrounds for the city's elite the streetcars served to anchor for development which offered pretty much everything you would need, utilitarian or not, within a short walk or ride to the streetcar line. Our cities' great urban business corridors were the direct result of this concentration of development that came with the streetcar. Who doesn't like the vibrant, sociable urban fabric of Ludlow in Clifton or Erie in Hyde Park? Guess what: streetcars built those.

 

Suburbanites do want streetcars and many just don't know it. This is made plainly evident in how many of them go out and spend their money in these streetcar developments and they would have quite a few more options than are currently available to spend a Friday or Saturday night out on the town before heading back to their quiet retreat, if they would look at it this way. Heck, just imagine several of them wanting to head out to Warsaw Ave in Price Hill to spend money at numerous businesses over there day and night.

 

The same applies in Columbus where tons of suburbanites head out to the Short North in addition to urban residents to shop, eat, and drink especially on the 1st Saturday of each month when Gallery Hop takes place and suburbanites flock in full force (though not so much for the galleries). This may be one of the best examples anywhere of them seeking out and paying quite a bit just to dabble in an urban lifestyle. Suffice it to say, that the disparity between this revitalized streetcar business district on N High St is greater than anywhere else in the state when compared to the lagging, but once booming streetcar districts found on E Main, W Broad, E Livingston (where the remnants of three theatres remind you that this was someplace to head out to at night to watch a show and then eat and drink as part of the Columbus nightlife scene, which has since disappeared here) where you can still see that when there was a streetcar heading down these streets that the businesses were then full, but when the streetcar lines were removed the anchors in place for businesses and residents were also removed and with highways also pulling development away this was a perfect storm to ensure the decline of these districts.

 

If only we started to get a streetcar line running again on these streets could we see some semblance to the vibrancy that once existed there. And to think that there is any sizable number of people in Cincinnati who would oppose the guaranteed expedited revitalization of a one-of-a-kind gorgeous neighborhood like OTR that could top the Short North as the state's #1 urban business district thanks to being blessed with superior architecture and density. But if you don't want OTR to compete with the Short North, that's just dandy: you can just make the hour and a half drive to spend your money here in the most economically successful urban district in the state, rather than drive 15 minutes in your own backyard.

 

Suburbanites themselves are some of the best proof that streetcar developments are an economic asset to our cities today even decades after they were facing serious disrepair and disinvestment. This is just so cut and clear I just don't see how this point is overlooked on both sides.

- Kasich was unapologetic about the yanking of $51.8 million in state funding for Cincinnati’s proposed streetcar from Downtown to the Uptown area – a move that was a serious setback to the plan.  When it was suggested that many of the young professionals who live downtown and along the proposed streetcar route – the kind of young people Kasich said he wants to keep in Ohio – support the project, the governor said the project does not make economic sense. “It would soak up all our new capital improvement dollars; and there is nothing to indicate that spending money on that is going to create something cool….having a streetcar is not going to prevent them (young people) from getting out of town.”

 

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2011/04/14/kasich-haley-barbour-for-president/

 

Just that quote alone is proof of his disconnect.... you shouldn't be "preventing" people from leaving.... you should be making them want to stay. Government can be seen as a business just like anything else.... you need to remain competitive w/ other governments to attract "customers".... and Ohio in general is NOT competitive at this point. People move and/or stay here begrudgingly, not enthusiastically.

Keith M.: Sounds like a good LTE for the Enquirer.

^ Agreed!  Send it in.

Via WLWT:

 

"We're going to go forward," City Councilmember Laure Quinlivan. "There will be a plan announced next week, I believe, on the new route, which is not going to be as long as what we were going to start with."

 

If it doesn't go from the Banks to Findlay Market I'd rather just wait.  I'm fine with losing the Vine St. connector- but changing much else makes me very weary.

I think (hope) what we'll see is just the elimination of the Vine St. connector for phase 1. The Vine connector (and maybe some additional UC track connection) should be in a later phase.

Good news.  Lets get this construction going!

Via WLWT:

 

"We're going to go forward," City Councilmember Laure Quinlivan. "There will be a plan announced next week, I believe, on the new route, which is not going to be as long as what we were going to start with."

 

If it doesn't go from the Banks to Findlay Market I'd rather just wait.  I'm fine with losing the Vine St. connector- but changing much else makes me very weary.

 

 

Video is up: http://www.wlwt.com/money/27548659/detail.html

 

CINCINNATI -- There's nothing cool about the Cincinnati streetcar, said Gov. John Kasich.

 

The Ohio Republican, who recently said he wanted to raise the state's cultural cachet, defined cool as Jeff Ruby's restaurants, a first-place Reds team, the Ohio River, the University of Cincinnati and Xavier University.

 

But Kasich gave a thumbs-down to the city's proposed transit line, declining to offer his support for state funding that was rejected this week by a transportation board he appointed.

 

The streetcar's supporters said they'll go around the governor to get something started.

 

cont

 

Via WLWT:

 

"We're going to go forward," City Councilmember Laure Quinlivan. "There will be a plan announced next week, I believe, on the new route, which is not going to be as long as what we were going to start with."

 

If it doesn't go from the Banks to Findlay Market I'd rather just wait.  I'm fine with losing the Vine St. connector- but changing much else makes me very weary.

 

Agreed. Vine Street can be put off as a future phase, but the Banks - Findlay Market loop is critical. I've heard some talk in the grapevine about cutting off the southern end at Fifth Street instead of the Banks, but IMO, that would be counterproductive and wouldn't save as much money as postponing the Vine Street segment.

There won't be an anti-streetcar issue on the ballot this year.

 

Giggity?  Giggity!

Via WLWT:

 

"We're going to go forward," City Councilmember Laure Quinlivan. "There will be a plan announced next week, I believe, on the new route, which is not going to be as long as what we were going to start with."

 

If it doesn't go from the Banks to Findlay Market I'd rather just wait.  I'm fine with losing the Vine St. connector- but changing much else makes me very weary.

 

Agreed. Vine Street can be put off as a future phase, but the Banks - Findlay Market loop is critical. I've heard some talk in the grapevine about cutting off the southern end at Fifth Street instead of the Banks, but IMO, that would be counterproductive and wouldn't save as much money as postponing the Vine Street segment.

 

I truly believe that would be a horrible and incredibly short sighted idea.    I spend 90% of my week going from the banks to clifton and at a million stops in between.  The corryville stop will have minimal traffic at first- .  Once it is extended to the zoo, hospital, etc, it will be VERY busy- until then, if we can't afford it, don't do it- focus elsewhere! The Banks stop, however, are key to the potential of the Streetcar, are opening right now with more units scheduled for 2013.

 

I, as much as anyone, know the benefits of the streetcar go far beyond transportation- BUT transportation is still a key part of it- and since a dozen bus lines go from corryville or north OTR to 5th street (govt. square) while none go from north OTR to the Banks- the "5th street" stop idea will take a lot of heat from the media, critics and skeptics.

 

In my opinion, it will incite more attacks/criticism than simply doing the downtown loop without Vine St.

^ And terminating the line at Fifth Street would require an extra block of track to get from Walnut to Main, which was never part of the plan. It would make for a convenient transfer to buses at Government Square (presumably the track would run just south of the bus platform), but offer very little in the way of other benefits.

IMHO The Banks/Riverfront has to be included. The stadiums are an area where people from outside the city come, go watch a game then leave (not all, but a lot). Having the Streetcar right at Main outside of GABP becomes an option for these people to see it and think "hey, that looks easy to navigate, lets go explore downtown."

That was my big question that I posed earlier: why have no major corporate backers (the ones with the big bucks and are willing to show it) supported the streetcar? 5/3? No. Kroger? No. Macy's? No. They all support Over-the-Rhine; they all fund 3CDC, along with a list of other corporations.

 

I always wondered about this, too, since the streetcar dovetails well with what 3CDC is doing, and 3CDC is sort of a project of the downtown corporate community, to some degree (based on their funding of it).  The streecar would enhance this investment.

 

 

Seems like a downtown/Findlay loop would work good.  Findlay could be a tourist attraction in its own right, but it also helps if people want to go grocery shopping and live downtown. 

 

Now, if I recall correct (sure its upthread somethwere), wasnt the original plan pretty much to stay in the basin, and the route up-the-hill to the UC area was a later addition to the project? 

 

Why would there be opposition to going back to the original plan?

 

 

There are executives on 3CDC who are very much opposed to the Streetcar.  One of them is an editor at the enquirer if I'm not mistaken.  Also, 3CDC is worried the Streetcar would take up TIF funds that 3CDC depends on for what it does. 

I know it makes absolutely know sense to me either why 3CDC doesn't help us out a little with this project.  It would strengthen everything they are doing downtown.

Keith M.: Sounds like a good LTE for the Enquirer.

 

+1 on that suggestion.  Just cut and paste what you wrote.  A lot of people read those opinion sections.  It always helps to see more support there!

Seems like a downtown/Findlay loop would work good.  Findlay could be a tourist attraction in its own right, but it also helps if people want to go grocery shopping and live downtown. 

 

Now, if I recall correct (sure its upthread somethwere), wasnt the original plan pretty much to stay in the basin, and the route up-the-hill to the UC area was a later addition to the project? 

 

Why would there be opposition to going back to the original plan?

 

 

 

Yes, you recall that correctly.  I'm not sure if there would be much opposition from uptown streetcar supporters at this point.  There was a huge push to include the uptown connector a few years ago, but that was before Ohio elected an anti-rail ideaologue as the new governor.  My hope is that streetcar supporters in Clifton will understand that the situation has changed and we really just need to get the original loop built while we can.  Any extensions should be easy after people see how great the streetcar really is.

 

But who knows?  They could change the plan pretty drastically next week.  I personally think that the easiest thing is just to eliminate the uptown portion of the system for now.  We could use more time to figure out the details on which street to use anyway, and it would remove many of COAST's insane claims about grading issues from the discussion. 

 

Also, I think that much of the value in rail lines over bus lines comes from them being extremely easy for newcomers to figure out.  This encourages people to hop on because you always have a good idea where you're going and where you came from; with a bus you feel like you could end up anywhere, with no idea of how to get back. The downtown/OTR loop is much cleaner and easier to figure out than the loop+extension, so it might be better just to start with that anyway.

I may be remembering incorrectly, but I think it was Qualls who really pushed for the Uptown to be built at the same time. 

There are executives on 3CDC who are very much opposed to the Streetcar.  One of them is an editor at the enquirer if I'm not mistaken.  Also, 3CDC is worried the Streetcar would take up TIF funds that 3CDC depends on for what it does. 

I know it makes absolutely know sense to me either why 3CDC doesn't help us out a little with this project.  It would strengthen everything they are doing downtown.

 

I agree.  Such a weird position to take from their standpoint.  I realize why the editor of the Enquirer hates the idea but it makes no sense.

 

Also, there are grumblings out there that Carl Lindner is fighting hard against the project behind the scenes

There are executives on 3CDC who are very much opposed to the Streetcar.  One of them is an editor at the enquirer if I'm not mistaken.  Also, 3CDC is worried the Streetcar would take up TIF funds that 3CDC depends on for what it does.

I know it makes absolutely know sense to me either why 3CDC doesn't help us out a little with this project.  It would strengthen everything they are doing downtown.

 

I don't believe 3CDC uses TIF funds, the vast majority of their work is accomplished through New Market tax credits.

I'd imagine that some of these guys that are really hardcore against the streetcar are afraid of their suburban investments losing value if the streetcar and development around it becomes "too" successful.

No -- I think the real danger from the perspective of [cough] Western-Southern is that the streetcar raises the value of property outside areas of downtown that they control. 

Jmeck, can you expand on your statement?

Going back to the height limits of the 70's-80's -- they were established ostensibly for aesthetic purposes, when in fact they kept people from building office towers on land the old Cincinnati money didn't control.  There has always been the fear that Central Parkway could poach Downtown, which is why I think it doesn't have any direct highway connections.  I think also that's why there was the effort this decade to occupy two large parking lots with the Gateway garage and the new SCPA.  The streetcar raises the value of empty lots near Court St., also the St. Xavier parking lot and big lot between it and the Power Building. 

 

This is actually a big reason why big money opposes rapid transit systems in most American cities.  The lack of privately owned land near the capitol mall is cited as a reason why the Washington Metro was met with little opposition.  Meanwhile, systems like MARTA, by being built as a subway into Midtown, was clearly intended to expand the size of Atlanta's downtown. 

 

 

 

 

 

Jmeck,  That is interesting.  I have never before heard of the height restriction arguement regarding the old money and their land.  Is this just a supposition or is it fact, not that there would be any way to actually substantiate it?

Sent in my last post as a LTTE (with modifications).

Sent in my last post as a LTTE (with modifications).

 

80/20 odds the Enquirer will screen it out because you make too good of an argument

Sent in my last post as a LTTE (with modifications).

 

Awesome.

 

Modify it again (make it slightly more Cbus-centric), and you could send it to the Dispatch, too.

Robert Fogelson's book Downtown (Yale Univ.) makes the specific historic argument behind Jmeck's broader supposition. Downtown's are only as valuable as the owners of that land can create value as it intersects scarcity.

^Dave, I can't believe that you've also seen that book.  It's definitely the most comprehensive and readable explanations of how we got to where we are.  Cincinnati is discussed many times in the book.  Height limits were a big deal in Boston during the prewar era, whereas they became a big deal in Cincinnati in the postwar era. 

As with most Google Books, you can't read the whole thing. But you can read a good amount right here.

 

(And you can search for references to Cincinnati.)

I do have a PhD in Urban History (however unused). Allison Isenberg's Downtown America is good too - less structural and economic and more cultural. Fogelson is a fascinating figure. He was one of the main author's of the Kerner Report following the riots of the 1960s. He wrote some groundbreaking works on the policing in the city as well.

Sent in my last post as a LTTE (with modifications).

 

I hope you shortened it. It was a good argument to make. Most LTEs should be no more than 400 words, and some papers won't accept them longer than 200 words! A newspaper may let a 600-word LTE through if it's from a prominent person, or it's from someone who was previously targeted by the newspaper or attacked by another LTE.

Discussion of Fountain Square versus Canal St. appears on page 212.  I added a paragraph on this issue to my book toward the end of the writing process but apparently didn't send the updated version to the publisher, which is why it doesn't appear in the book.  The situation was pretty complicated: they didn't have space for the interuban terminal under any of the north/south streets.  Therefore if the interurbans were to terminate there, one of two things had to happen:

 

-Ideally, the subway would be built beneath Vine St. from the canal to fifth street, then under fifth between Vine and Main, then under Main from fifth to 3rd, where it would surface.  This would allow a huge multi-track terminal to be built beneath Fountain Square and Government square.  The estimated cost of this element was $1,000,000, or 1/6th of the available budget.  Keep in mind that simply tunneling under downtown was already consuming $1,000,000. This option basically was not affordable.

 

-The other option was to build the subway under Walnut St., then have the interurban terminal turn out under either Government Square or Fountain Square.  This situation was less than idea for several reasons, not the least being the need for switching operations across the mainline tracks. 

 

The other big problem with dedicating so much capital to interurban facilities was that at the time they were only estimated to constitute about 15% of the Rapid Transit Loop's traffic.  And don't discount the influence of the freight railroads -- no doubt they fought the Fountain Square interurban terminal since it would enable a level of service to the heart of the city that their intercity passenger trains could never achieve. 

 

 

Downtown America informed some of what I was doing on downtown Dayton..those pix/graphs/maps posts I did on urban renewal on the growth and decline of downtown.

 

...no doubt they fought the Fountain Square interurban terminal since it would enable a level of service to the heart of the city that their intercity passenger trains could never achieve.

 

Interesting about the downtown interurban terminal.  There was a plan for one in Milwaulkee, that also involved a short subway.  The deal with Milwaukee is they actually did build a high-speed grade seperated private rigt-of-way into downtown (along the Menominee Valley) from the west, but they never did finish their subway or or build a terminal.  I think the Milwaulkee interurban...the "speedrail"...came in on city streets after it sped downtown on the private ROW>

As with most Google Books, you can't read the whole thing. But you can read a good amount right here.

 

(And you can search for references to Cincinnati.)

HamCo Liberry has it.

Here's a piece I wrote on the meeting:

http://www.urbancincy.com/2011/04/analysis-kasich-trac-played-politics-burned-cincinnati/

 

 

Analysis: Kasich, TRAC, played politics, “burned” Cincinnati

 

 

BY: JAKE MECKLENBORG

APRIL 18, 2011 – 10:30 AM

In 2010 there was no reason to believe that Cincinnati’s streetcar project was in jeopardy, as all capital funds had been identified and future casino revenues were expected to cover annual operations costs. Late in the year I expressed my optimism to a seasoned local preservationist, whose terse response took me by surprise: “You guys haven’t been burned yet”.

 

On Tuesday April 12, Cincinnati finally got burned. ODOT’s nine-member Transportation Review Advisory Council (TRAC) approved a budget that reallocated $52 million of federal funds from the Cincinnati Streetcar project to a variety of minor upstate projects. This decision came just five months after TRAC identified Cincinnati’s streetcar as the state’s highest-ranking project.

 

The “burning” actually started in March, when state representative Shannon Jones (R-Springboro) introduced an amendment to Ohio’s biennial transportation bill that read, “No state or federal funds may be encumbered, transferred, or spent pursuant to this or any other appropriations act for the Cincinnati Streetcar Project.” This two-pronged attack on the state’s allocation of federal funds to Cincinnati’s streetcar project was the thinly veiled directive of John Kasich, Ohio’s newly elected Republican governor.

 

For those who attended the April 12, 2011 TRAC meeting at ODOT headquarters in Columbus, Kasich’s fingerprints were obvious not just by the actions of TRAC appointees, but by the language and tone of ODOT staffers. The two-hour meeting could best be described as a kangaroo court – its outcome was never in doubt, with five or more ODOT staffers and TRAC members reciting coached lines throughout.

 

The existence of Jones’ streetcar-killing state legislation provided cover for the day’s proceedings, but ODOT director and TRAC chair Jerry Wray and the staffers who work beneath him nevertheless concocted justification independent of what he duplicitously called “bad legislation”. Funding for the Cincinnati Streetcar should be dropped, Wray and ODOT staffers argued, in favor of projects that promise to improve safety, especially two upstate railroad grade separation projects.

 

The grand orchestration of the meeting was not limited to Kasich-era appointees and ODOT staff; during public comments a fire chief remarked that five individuals had been killed at his area’s grade crossing since his service began some twenty years previous. His message was calculated: railroads are inherently unsafe, and modern streetcars, because they run on rails at-grade mixed with vehicular traffic, are dangerous to motorists and pedestrians.

 

A side show to this circus was the statement made by Jack Marchbanks, who was appointed to TRAC after the March 22, 2011 meeting. Other TRAC members didn’t even know his name, but he nevertheless arrived at the April 12th meeting prepared with props — a stack of CD’s and paperwork from a 2007 Columbus light rail study — to justify his vote against the Cincinnati Streetcar. Smiling, he insinuated that the legacy of the four-year Cincinnati Streetcar effort would ultimately be a similarly forgotten stack of CD’s and spiral bound reports.

 

Watching the morning’s proceedings like a hawk was Cincinnati mayor Mark Mallory, who has been the face of the streetcar project since 2008. As a state senator in the late 1990’s, he was involved in the legislation that established TRAC in 1997. Its formation coincided with a 6-cent increase in Ohio’s gasoline tax that added hundreds of millions to ODOT’s annual budget. TRAC intended to keep state representatives from directing pork projects to their districts, but last Tuesday Mallory was witness to its critical flaw: that TRAC’s chair is also ODOT’s director. Because Ohio’s governors appoint ODOT’s director, a sleazy appointee of Wray’s ilk is able to intimidate ODOT staff as well as shape the agenda of TRAC.

 

Much credit is due to Antoinette Selvey-Maddox, TRAC’s sole southwest Ohio representative. She was the only TRAC member to challenge the day’s prevailing winds – first questioning if there was any precedent for the state legislation that blocks state allocations of federal funds to the Cincinnati Streetcar, then introducing a motion that would have seen a separate vote introduced to the process regarding the streetcar project.

 

The appearance of the motion clearly disturbed chairman Wray – he was not certain that votes were sufficient to defeat it. In short order it was defeated 4-3, but we must wonder, if the entire nine-member TRAC had been attendance, would the outcome have been different (two of TRAC’s nine members were absent from the year’s most important meeting)? A minute after the failure of her motion, Selvey-Maddox cast the only vote in opposition to TRAC’s 2011 recommendations.

 

The configuration of the meeting bears some description: it was held in the same small basement room where TRAC usually meets, with room for few people other than ODOT staffers, speakers, and media. The roughly 75 Cincinnatians who traveled to Columbus were seated in a nearby room, out of sight of both TRAC members and the media.

 

They watched the meeting on closed-circuit television, with poor audio. Apparently the microphone of Selvey-Maddox was not turned on, or was not working well, and so those in the overflow room did not come to appreciate her actions. The absurdity of this situation could not have been better scripted – an auditorium which could have accommodated everyone sat unused directly across the hallway from TRAC’s meeting room.

 

Approximately 75 Cincinnatians made the trip to Columbus in support of the streetcar. Speaking on behalf of the project were Mayor Mark Mallory, councilwoman Roxanne Qualls, councilwoman Laure Quinlivan, Cincinnatians for Progress officer Rob Richardson, and representatives from Christ Hospital, Sibcy Cline Realtors, Bromwell’s, and the University of Cincinnati. Opponents filled just four of ten allotted speaking slots, and no other opponents appeared to have made the trip.

 

Although Tuesday’s actions are a setback, Cincinnati is expected to announce a revised streetcar plan this week. With zero funding available from Hamilton County, and presumably zero available from Ohio until Kasich leaves office in 2014 or 2018, the attraction of additional public funds will be limited to direct federal grants (such as the Urban Circulators grant) and new or expanded local sources.

but we must wonder, if the entire nine-member TRAC had been attendance, would the outcome have been different (two of TRAC’s nine members were absent from the year’s most important meeting)?

 

I've been wondering about this since last weeks meeting. Their staff schedules these meetings months in advance! And if I remember correctly, these same two members were absent for March's working session...

Well the meeting minutes since Jan 1 aren't posted, so I don't know who attended these previous meetings.  Not only did these two not show, Marchbanks was appointed within the last week.  If he had just kept his mouth shut, it wouldn't have been so obvious that he was brought in to guarantee a no vote. 

 

Jake, thanks for the excellent review.

 

   

 

 

 

Well the meeting minutes since Jan 1 aren't posted, so I don't know who attended these previous meetings.  Not only did these two not show, Marchbanks was appointed within the last week.  If he had just kept his mouth shut, it wouldn't have been so obvious that he was brought in to guarantee a no vote. 

His vote is perplexing and very disturbing because Jack, as District 6 director in the Taft Administration, was a quiet but reliable voice for transit within ODOT.

Remember we're in year one of possibly 8 years of Kasich.  These people are saving their own asses.  It would be foolish for anyone with ambitions of a higher position within ODOT to cross Wray.  Although Marchbanks is I believe not currently working for ODOT, he might be seeking a return, as did Wray.  Wray himself, if his white hair is any indication, is probably close to retirement, so people are definitely setting themselves up to take his seat.     

Wray actually did retire from ODOT in 2001.  For the past 10 years maybe he has been collecting state retirement while working as a lobbyist for the Asphalt Association