Why would they rewrite something when the people that signed the ballot was because of how it was written????? Do they have to resign the ballot??? I wouldn't mind but this is dirty politics.

That makes no sense.  The ballot language already includes the term streetcar.

Maybe they want to rewrite the definition of "streetcar system?"

I think they were changing the name of the ballot measure, not the official ballot language, to include streetcar.  Of course, Winburn thought it was a conspiracy leaving it out.  It sounds like it will actually have streetcar system in the name which is good - I think it would have been misleading to only have streetcar because the measure is broader than that.

Is this a line item approval process, or would this work simply be part of an annual budget?  Again, I suspect that the county commissioners and others got these utilities people to blow this hot air with the promise of future political favors.  There's simply no way that the city was blindsided by this news, and there's no way that they would have progressed things to this point with the knowledge that the county could block it in this backhanded way. [\quote]

 

It is a line item approval process, but most projects are approved without much controversy as part of the annual budget.

 

The county isn't blocking the streetcar; they just are unwilling to help fund it.

Anyone ask what does P&G thinks of the streetcar??

 

curious myself on this one...

I think they were changing the name of the ballot measure, not the official ballot language, to include streetcar.  Of course, Winburn thought it was a conspiracy leaving it out.  It sounds like it will actually have streetcar system in the name which is good - I think it would have been misleading to only have streetcar because the measure is broader than that.

 

It's better than just having 'streetcar', but only marginally as both are very misleading.

Hartmann, Monzel: MSD not footing bill for streetcar costs

Date: Friday, September 9, 2011, 6:00am EDT

Dan Monk

Senior Staff Reporter - Business Courier

 

 

The city of Cincinnati has asked Hamilton County to approve a streetcar cost-sharing arrangement with the Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati.

 

Two Republican Hamilton County commissioners, who set policy and approve budgets for the sewer district, say they will oppose the proposal.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/print-edition/2011/09/09/hartmann-monzel-msd-not-footing-bill.html

since city residents don't pay county taxes, that seems only fair

oh wait.....

Here's the ballot language:

 

"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 rights of way through the year 2020, by enacting

new Article XVI?"

 

I don't understand how people can just define terms how they please and they put them on the ballot.  How is it legal to refer to a 'streetcar system' as 'a system of passenger vehicles operated on rails constructed primarily in existing public rights of way'.  Could I get something on the ballot to ban terrorists from the City of Cincinnati and define terrorists as 'a system of passenger vehicles operated on rails constructed primarily in existing public rights of way?'  Or better yet, as 'COAST'? 

^I am surprised that the language is so clear. Their definition of "streetcar" does not prohibit Amtrak, the proposed 3-C, the zoo train, the Delta train (if it were in Cincinnati,) the I&O dinner train, trackless trollies, buses designed to look like trollies, the proposed Eastern Corridor commuter line, or the once proposed Kingport light rail, aerial cable lines to Mt. Adams, inclines, or the Wiremobile but it does clearly prohibit the OTR loop that we have been calling the Cincinnati Streetcar.

That is because they need a place to dump their problems. As cincinnati has pushed its "problems" out into other areas, suburbanites have been stunned and clueless as to how to handle it. This is a desperate, rear-guard, hail mary, last gasp attempt to try and stop the movement of "problems" to their areas. In a way, it actually is in their self-interest. But, many suburbanites are swimming against the tide for the first time in their lives. They are bound to be extreme and confused. We in cincinnati are neither and will show them how local democracy works.

^I am surprised that the language is so clear. Their definition of "streetcar" does not prohibit Amtrak, the proposed 3-C, the zoo train, the Delta train (if it were in Cincinnati,) the I&O dinner train, trackless trollies, buses designed to look like trollies, the proposed Eastern Corridor commuter line, or the once proposed Kingport light rail, aerial cable lines to Mt. Adams, inclines, or the Wiremobile but it does clearly prohibit the OTR loop that we have been calling the Cincinnati Streetcar.

 

 

It's certainly not infinitely broad but I think "existing public rights of way" is broad enough to be of concern.

^I am surprised that the language is so clear. Their definition of "streetcar" does not prohibit Amtrak, the proposed 3-C, the zoo train, the Delta train (if it were in Cincinnati,) the I&O dinner train, trackless trollies, buses designed to look like trollies, the proposed Eastern Corridor commuter line, or the once proposed Kingport light rail, aerial cable lines to Mt. Adams, inclines, or the Wiremobile but it does clearly prohibit the OTR loop that we have been calling the Cincinnati Streetcar.

 

So what happens when they want to run the Eastern Corridor trains in existing public right of way on Pete Rose Way and into the RTC?

The phrase "existing public right of way" can mean any public own land through or over which a rail could run, be it city, county, or state owned within the city's boundaries. While it looks very specific, this language is again quite broad. Existing public rights or way does not limit it to streets. It includes abandoned rail beds the city still owns, existing but not used or ANY public land.

^"Existing, public right-of-way" does not include railroad right-of-way or city-owned land such as parks. It includes streets only.

 

The language says "primarily on existing, public right-of-way," which of course would be interpreted in court, but would most likely allow the Eastern Corridor to use Pete Rose Way if the route was "primarily" not on existing, public right-of-way.

 

Just did a quick check of both the Ohio Revised Code and Cincy Municipal Code and neither define the specific term "right-of-way" but, however, the Cincy code uses it to define both street rights-of-way and railroad rights-of-way implying that the term right-of-way includes both per say.

^Railroad rights-of-way are not public. The ballot language says public.

But if the public owns the land, it does count, and the ballot doesn't specify which public (city or state) only who's money.

 

And if the railroads abandoned the land, the ownership went to the owner of the abutting property, which in many cases was the city.

^No, no, no, no, no. Publicly owned land is NOT the same as "public right-of-way," which has a very strict definition.

 

"Existing, public rights-of-way" in Cincinnati refers primarily to streets. It includes "paper streets," or uninproved streets, and it includes streets not accessible to automobiles, such as hillside steps. It includes the public landing, and may include Findley Market.

 

"publically owned land" is entirely different. City Hall, Eden Park, firehouses, bicentennial park, the Blue Ash airport, and other publicly-owned lands that are not streets are not counted in the "right-of-way" definition.

 

Railroads are harder to figure out, and different rules apply to different railroads, but I can't think of a single example in Cincinnati where an abandoned railroad right-of-way became a public right-of-way.

 

 

 

 

 

^I am surprised that the language is so clear. Their definition of "streetcar" does not prohibit Amtrak, the proposed 3-C, the zoo train, the Delta train (if it were in Cincinnati,) the I&O dinner train, trackless trollies, buses designed to look like trollies, the proposed Eastern Corridor commuter line, or the once proposed Kingport light rail, aerial cable lines to Mt. Adams, inclines, or the Wiremobile but it does clearly prohibit the OTR loop that we have been calling the Cincinnati Streetcar.

 

^ Unsurprisingly, this is misleading. False, actually.

 

Here's a list of the known Greater Cincinnati rail projects that would be canceled or delayed by voter approval of the anti-rail charter amendment that Council put on the ballot. This is just off the top of my head, but I think it's a complete list.

 

NORTHEST CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL: This would be a new light line roughly parallel to I-71 that would be constructed between 12th Street in Covington to the northern edge of Blue Ash near I-275. Preliminary engineering is complete for this project. Other than the streetcar, it is the "most designed" of the several electric light rail and diesel-powered lines that have been proposed.

 

CENTRAL CORRIDOR LIGHT RAIL: This new light rail line would be built parallel to I-75. In the re-design of I-75, planners have more or less successfully reserved right-of-way for the trains as part of the highway reconstruction project.

 

EASTERN CORRIDOR RAIL: Two rail projects have been proposed for the Eastern Corridor. One of these would be a light rail line that would branch-off the Northeast Corridor (I-71) Light Rail at Xavier and travel east through Evanston, Hyde Park and Oakley before continuing on to Fairfax and beyond to the eastern suburbs. The other proposal is to put diesel trains on the Oasis Line between Clermont County and the Riverfront Transit Center, downtown.

 

UPTOWN STREETCAR: The city wants to commence a study evaluating potential routes and destinations of the Cincinnati Streetcar through the area around the University of Cincinnati. This would be an extension of the Downtown Streetcar.

 

DOWNTOWN STREETCAR: Because it travels on city streets, this project would be stopped by the broad ballot language.

 

Understand also that that the "ballot language" does not govern here. It is just shorthand for the full language that will be included in the Charter if the measure is adopted by voters, which is the global rail-banning text that was on their petitions. That's what willl effectively stop rail in Cincinnati for a generation.

Again what's the penalty for ignoring the ban? The ban on the state level, how long does that last?

"Existing, public rights-of-way" in Cincinnati refers primarily to streets. It includes "paper streets," or uninproved streets, and it includes streets not accessible to automobiles, such as hillside steps. It includes the public landing, and may include Findley Market.

 

Where did you get this definition of right-of-way? I couldn't find it in the Muni Code or the ORC...

We have to get a better at getting John's message out.  I have talked to numerous people who are for light rail and against the streetcar but were planning on voting against their own beliefs. 

 

I talked to one ex cop who basically echoed the 700wlw stance.  "Its a boondoggle, waste of money, trolley folly, streetcar to nowhere etc"

 

I basically told him.  "Listen. Our views on the streetcar are irrelevant now.  You have your beliefs thats fine.  But This initiative has wording that is murky enough to effectively stop all rail, including planning and private/public funds, for a decade"

 

He told me he thought I was wrong.

 

I simply told him "There's nothing really I can say to change your mind. But please Read the language for yourself.  If you still feel the way you do now, then by all means vote with Chris Smitherman and COAST.  But be warned, if you want light rail inside city limits, you are voting against your own interests.  Read Judge Painter's article in the Enquirer if you don't believe me"

 

And we moved on with our conversation.  No animosity, no insults, no childish catch phrases (after his 700wlw exchange).  I doubt I changed his mind but at least I made him think. 

 

The enquirer isn't going to report on the amendment until the last second.  They want to draw the streetcar out as long as possible for revenue.  700wlw is worthless.  They won't even acknowledge anything remotely bad about the amendment.  So its up to us. 

 

 

The Enquirer and 700WLW didn't announce their opposition to Issue 9 until, at most, 2 weeks before the election.  But they kept running anti-streetcar stuff the whole time. 

 

John, the uptown and downtown streetcars would clearly be prohibited if this amendment passes. That is the whole point.

 

The Northern, Central, and Eastern Corridors would not be affected:

• I-75 and I-71 are not public rights-of-way. They are limited access rights-of-way.
  
• The former CL&N, Wasson Line, Oasis Line, etc. are not public rights-of-way. They are private rights-of-way.
   
  In addition, none of those proposed lines are street railways. Street railways by definition run in the street. Anything going on in Blue Ash or Covington will not be affected at all because it is outside of the jurisdiction of the City of Cincinnati.
   
  I only read the ballot language. I didn't read the actual amendment.
   
  

  
  Where did you get this definition of right-of-way? I couldn't find it in the Muni Code or the ORC...
  

   
  Every public street is documented in the public records - or at least it should be. Some old ones are hard to find.

The light rail lines would converge on surface streets downtown and the unused subway tunnel and Riverfront Transit Center are city-owned right-of-ways.  If this charter amendment passes, rail will not be able to enter downtown Cincinnati, period.  The only conceivable way for a streetcar line to be built in what is now the City of Cincinnati would be for a new city to be established which quite literally follows the line in a strip and enough blocks of residential to have 5,000 residents.   

 

The light rail lines would converge on surface streets downtown and the unused subway tunnel and Riverfront Transit Center are city-owned right-of-ways.  If this charter amendment passes, rail will not be able to enter downtown Cincinnati, period.  The only conceivable way for a streetcar line to be built in what is now the City of Cincinnati would be for a new city to be established which quite literally follows the line in a strip and enough blocks of residential to have 5,000 residents.   

 

 

Now there's an idea!  That would be a fun little piece of unique history to add to a region filled with amazing complexities.  Tourists would flock to the City of Streetcar Route, OH the way they do to the tiny City of London within greater London or the enclaves and exclaves of Baarle-Hertog and Baarle-Nassau. 

 

I love it...vote Yes on the Streetcar Ban!  LOL

If this charter amendment passes, rail will not be able to enter downtown Cincinnati, period.

 

No, the ballot language does not prohibit rail from entering downtown. There are many ways that it could happen.

 

Here's the ballot language again. I added the bold.

 

"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 rights of way through the year 2020, by enacting

new Article XVI?"

 

The ballot prohibits the City of Cincinnati and no one else from spending money on a streetcar.  Hamilton County, SORTA, the State of Ohio, the Indiana and Ohio Railroad, the University of Cincinnati, or anyone else is not prohibited from spending money on a streetcar. You might be able to argue that SORTA is prohibited by extension if they recieve funding from the City of Cincinnati.

 

The prohibition specifies streetcars only. Streetcars by definition run in the street. The subway and riverfront transit center are not streets.

 

The word "primarily" leaves a lot of room for interpretation. It does not strictly prohibit any kind of rail from occupying any street. A light rail line from, say, Kings Island to downtown that occupies the downtown streets would not be "primarily" in the street. It would be "primarily" on private right-of-way parallel to I-71. The Eastern Corridor would be "primarily" on railroad right-of-way. A court of law would have the final say on the interpretation.

 

"Existing" excludes new right-of-way, regardless of whether it is public or not. The once-proposed Mt. Auburn tunnel would be a new right-of-way.

 

"Public" excludes private rights-of-way, such as railroads. The OASIS line, the former CL&N, the Wasson line, the Hyde Park Peavine line and all operating railroads are private rights-of-way.

 

"Rails" (plural) excludes monorail. Not that anyone expected to build a monorail. For what it's worth,"Rails" also excludes trackless trolleys such as in Dayton, buses decorated to look like trolleys such as in Louisville, and bus-rapid-transit.

 

For the record, I'm not for this amendment, but my interpretation of the ballot language shows that it was specifically targeted toward streetcars, not to any of the other rail projects. Probably the petitioners learned their lesson from the last attempt.

 

 

If this charter amendment passes, rail will not be able to enter downtown Cincinnati, period.

The subway and riverfront transit center are not streets.

 

And yet for ANY passenger vehicles operated on rails to access the center, it'll have to run on existing public streets.

^ Yes, it's true that a passenger rail vehicle of any kind will have to oocupy or at least cross a public street to get to the transit center, but that's not prohibited by the ballot language unless it meets ALL of the conditions that I outlined above.

 

Prohibited under the ballot language are streetcars funded by the city and running on rails primarily on existing public rights-of-way.

 

 

[ Tourists would flock to the City of Streetcar Route, OH.

 

You joke about this, but I sometimes wonder if Ohio cities are hampered by our own laws, and the only way to make progress moving forward is to completely change our political process. The City of Cincinnati is it's own worst enemy sometimes. This is a whole 'nother topic, though.

If the citizens of the city of Cincinnati are smart. They will defeat this and take no chances.

These are the types of sociopaths we're fighting:

 

 

 

"Public" excludes private rights-of-way, such as railroads. The OASIS line, the former CL&N, the Wasson line, the Hyde Park Peavine line and all operating railroads are private rights-of-way.

 

 

Not all railroad rights of way are privately owned. Most are, but not all. ;-)

^So where in Ohio can I put flanged wheels on my automobile or wagon and drive it on a public railroad right-of-way?  And how much is the toll? :-D

I don't think you understand the definition of public and right-of-way... public refers to who owns, in this case public ownership, i.e. city, state, or other public agency.

 

Right-of-way as defined by Hill & Hill's legal dictionary:

 

right of way n. 1) a pathway or road with a specific description (e.g. "right to access and egress 20 feet wide along the northern line of Lot 7 of the Cobb subdivision in page 75 of maps"). 2) the right to cross property to go to and from another parcel. The right of way may be a specific grant of land or an "easement," which is a right to pass across another's land. The mere right to cross without a specific description is a "floating" easement. Some rights of way are for limited use such as repair of electric lines or for deliveries to the back door of a store. Railroads own title to a right of way upon which to build permanent tracks. 3) in traffic ordinances, a driver is entitled to the "right of way" to proceed first ahead of other vehicles or pedestrians, depending on certain rules of the road, such as the first to reach an intersection. Failure to yield the right of way to the vehicle or person entitled to it can result in a citation and fine, to say nothing of an accident. It can also be evidence of negligence in a lawsuit for injuries suffered in an accident. (See: easement, floating easement, access, egress)

 

Can someone else weigh in here?

^No, "public" refers to access, not ownership. Vine Street is a public right-of-way. It is open to everyone, all the time. All utilities can use it, subject to Ohio law. There is no discrimination of access. Technically, the City of Cincinnati doesn't own Vine Street - it is held in trust by the State of Ohio for the benefit of the citizens. The City of Cincinnati merely maintains it.

 

By contrast, Eden Park, City Hall, the Ludlow firehouse, fountain square, and the Blue Ash Airport are city-owned lands but are not part of the public right-of-way. Access to the public is restricted. Utilities can't use them without permission from the City.

 

To determine whether a place is a public right-of-way or not, it is necessary to find documentation for it. Hopefully, this can be found in the recorder's office. Any controversy is ulitimately settled by a court.

 

 

 

 

For the record, I'm not for this amendment, but my interpretation of the ballot language shows that it was specifically targeted toward streetcars, not to any of the other rail projects. Probably the petitioners learned their lesson from the last attempt.

 

It doesn't really matter how you or other rational people interpret this language.  It matters how COAST and rail opponents interpret it.  If this were to pass, and Hamilton County or SORTA attempted to build the Eastern Corridor commuter rail within Cincinnati's boundaries, COAST would file suit to stop it and could tie the whole project up for years while the courts try to interpret the ballot language.  The same is true if Ohio tries to revive the 3C Corridor plans any time before 2020.

"Public right-of-way" means any right-of-way owned by the public (regardless of whether it's city, county, state, or federal). I'm not sure what's so confusing about that. Just because you're not allowed to ride a bicycle on I-75 doesn't make it any less of a public right-of-way.

"Public right-of-way" means any right-of-way owned by the public (regardless of whether it's city, county, state, or federal). I'm not sure what's so confusing about that. Just because you're not allowed to ride a bicycle on I-75 doesn't make it any less of a public right-of-way.

 

That's what I was trying to say. It's ownership, not access. I-75 being a limited access highway does not make it a private ROW. It is still public. Likewise railway ROW owned by SORTA along the Riverfront (and part and parcel of the Oasis Line proposal) is also public ROW, because it is owned by a public agency. It's (the rail ROW) existence within the City of Cincinnati precludes it from being used for and "system of system of passenger vehicles operated on rails constructed primarily in existing public rights of way" as part of this amendment.

 

If you still think it means otherwise, please provide something to back up your claim.

These are the types of sociopaths we're fighting:

 

Good ol Barry Hostman is on top of this on Twitter:

 

9:26 AM "In ballot campaign with plenty of over-the-top rhetoric, new COAST tweet comparing streetcar to 9/11 widely seen as especially bad taste."  via Barry Horstman

 

9:29 AM "COAST tweet: 3% of FDNY died ...by terrorism.Today Cinti lost 17.5% of fire companies by brownouts to pay for a streetcar. Which is worse?"  via Barry Horstman

 

 

Nothing yet on Cincinnati.com though...

WLWT seems to agree with Neville:

 

http://www.wlwt.com/politics/29154591/detail.html

 

"A charter amendment is on the November ballot that would ban the city from putting money toward a streetcar for several years, as well as ban the city from investing in any passenger rail project"

WLWT seems to agree with Neville:

 

http://www.wlwt.com/politics/29154591/detail.html

 

"A charter amendment is on the November ballot that would ban the city from putting money toward a streetcar for several years, as well as ban the city from investing in any passenger rail project"

 

As do Judge Mark Painter and Citybeat.

The Second Anti-Rail Petition that has been put forth by COAST and the NAACP is much wider in scope than presented by the issue's proponents, and would ban all passenger rail in Cincinnati for the next ten years.

 

While the proponents of the issue state that this blocks 'streetcars' it is much more expansive.  The term “streetcar” is defined under both Ohio and Cincinnati Law as:

 

“Streetcar” means a car, other than a railroad train, for transporting persons or property, operated upon rails principally within a street or highway (R.C. 4511.01®, CMC 1401-01-S14).

 

This is a perfectly acceptable and accurate definition of a streetcar—a rail vehicle that runs in the street. But the Second Anti-Rail Petition blocks spending not on “Streetcars” but on a “Streetcar System.” Streetcar opponents deliberately created a more expansive definition, by calling it a “Streetcar System” instead of using the existing legal term “Streetcar” in an attempt to block other forms of rail transportation as well. The proponents of the Anti-Rail Amendment define a Streetcar System as:

 

a system of passenger vehicles operated on rails primarily in existing public rights of way.

 

This affects all passenger rail as the definition of “right of way” under Ohio Law is so expansive.

 

A general term denoting land, property, or the interest therein, usually in the configuration of a strip, acquired for or devoted to transportation purposes. [R.C. 4511.01(UU)(2)]

 

The City of Cincinnati or SORTA, a public entity, own the rights of way for where any light rail system would travel. Any rights of way owned by these public entities would be public rights-of-way. (A public right of way doesn’t require that all types of vehicles are permitted. The hillside steps are not open to automobiles. Columbia Parkway is not open to trucks. But both are public rights-of-way)

 

Because any light rail right of way owed by the City or SORTA is a public right of way, the Second Anti-Rail Petition would prevent any spending for the next ten years on light rail.

 

This broad definition of a “Streetcar System” would prevent an elevated train. The “El” or the previously proposed Skyloop couldn’t be constructed in and above the right of way. And it would prevent Cincinnati from rebuilding any of the inclines. The land underneath the inclines would be a public right of way.

 

The first step any competent attorney drafting this ballot language would take is to research the legal definition of “streetcar.” But by taking the extra step of creating a new, broader definition of “streetcar system” it is clear the proponents of this Anti-Rail Amendment are attempting to block any type of rail transit from being built in Cincinnati for the next decade.

Is something is suppose to magically happen after the 9 years if it's approved by voters? Why set it at 10 years? why not 30-40 years? This will do more harm than good.

COAST leader apologizes for “insensitive’ 9/11 reference in streetcar tweet

 

Proponents of a proposed Cincinnati streetcar were outraged Sunday when they saw a tweet from an officer of COAST (Citizens Against Additional Taxes and Spending) which compared the deaths of New York City firefighters on 9/11 to brown-outs at Cincinnati fire stations.

 

COAST treasurer Mark Miller, author of the tweet, apologized for the reference Monday morning.

 

“Invoking 9/11 was a mistake,” Miller told the Enquirer. “It was stupid. That was insensitive. And I apologize.”

 

The tweet, which showed up on Twitter Sunday morning read: “3% of FDNY died 10 years ago by terrorism. Today Cincinnati lost 17.5 percent of fire companies by brownouts to pay for a streetcar. Which is worse?”

 

About $7 million has been spent so far on streetcar studies, route signage and other items related to the streetcar, but all of that money has come from the city’s capital improvements budget, according to Vice Mayor Roxanne Qualls, who chairs council’s finance committee. The fire department is funded by the city’s operating budget.

 

“It was in bad taste, showed poor judgment and is simply not true,” Qualls said. “It is enough to make your jaw drop.”

 

Cont

^So where in Ohio can I put flanged wheels on my automobile or wagon and drive it on a public railroad right-of-way?  And how much is the toll? :-D

 

There you go again, forming opinions without the benefit of foreknowledge. Public right of way refers to ownership, not access.

 

Oh, and be careful when you think you're throwing out a crazy example just to prove a point:

 

If the amendment did pass, would it be possible to sue the city for having deliberately misleading language in its charter? The legal definition of “streetcar” (as defined by the State of Ohio) should trump the City of Cincinnati definition whether the word “system” is appended or not.