Please also ask what the cost difference would be if they continued building the streetcar while debating and how much we would still be spending each day that we put it on hold. and what additional costs that would incur if we paused it instead of letting it continue during the wait for a second opinion. i think this is a important question to have answered before we pause the project. so we can hopefully bring this project in at or under budget like it would if it wasn't toyed with.

Has anybody heard if Mallory, Qualls, Quinlivan plan on doing anything in supporting the streetcar now that they're out of office?

Mallory was saying he wanted to work for Ford on the Dan Hurley show.

 

Ford Motor Company?

For those who can go (I wish I could skip work today), please emphasize that while they are trying to be responsible by delaying the project to study the costs, ask them to get a confirmation from the feds in writing that a delay will not jeapordize the federal funding. No delays until we have the confirmation. Tell them it is irresponsible to vote on a delay or defund until they know that will not cancel the streetcar with the loss of federal funds. This may be the most reasonable argument we have to some of the votes on council.

 

 

I like the idea, but I doubt the Feds would ever put that in writing.  However, they may put the opposite in writing.  Your suggestion does force them to consider out loud that "pausing" could result in a $44M notice from the Feds showing up this week.  How do they plan to pay that?  How to they plan to compensate CAF?  And so on.  They'd better have answers to those questions before they agree to change anything.  If they don't have those answers, they would be reckless to vote on any change in course today.  There needs to be some accountability.

Make sure to point out that the FTA has specifically stated the opposite (that a pause means pulling funds). Use that fact to emphasize the importance of hearing from them that a pause will not mean the grants go away, and that it would be totally irresponsible to take on blind faith that they were lying previously.

^YES.  We've been saying that a vote to pause equals a vote to cancel.  But... what we really need to make it clear is that a vote to pause is actually a vote to forfeit the federal grants. 

 

Theoretically, the streetcar could still be completed via referendum if the grants are forfeited.  It would just be a hell of a lot more expensive, and nobody on either side wants that.  The FTA has spoken, so the burden of proof must be on City Council and the Mayor BEFORE they decide to "pause".

Cranley's Chief of Staff is saying that they will present 11 ordinances and a motion today. (It's not totally clear if all are streetcar-related.) Expect Cranley to do this in the dirtiest way possible: try to pass multiple ordinances so that we have to gather signatures and vote to repeal each one of them.

oh lord, the rules are: there are no rules...

Cranleyville

I'm sensing today is the day that will be looked back upon as the day Cincinnati truly jumped the shark.  When the sunrises tomorrow we are on a path to becoming Evansville, IN.  Let the divestment begin. 

Any updates on what's happening in that 12pm meeting?

^ Absolutely nothing.  Arguing about legality of the meeting without rules.  Seelbach proposed delaying the meeting until later in the week in order to be able to read and digest the ordinances.  Motion denied 5-4.  Now adjourned until 1:00, when the ordinances should be finished.  Ugh.

Recessed until 1pm.

Seelbach, Young and Simpson were bringing up numerous concerns on the process of the committee (no official committee was made, no rules were in place) and most notably that as of 12:30 they still had not seen the proposed ordinances that there supposed to be voting on. Arguing that the process was not transparent and would be subject to litigation risk.

 

Mann called a recess until 1pm to end the debate, at which time the ordinances should be available.

 

Most notably, on the video feed, after they went into recess you could see the fabulous 4-some of Mann, Cranley, Winburn and Smithermann huddling together to discuss how to respond.

 

Very sloppy start to a new council....

OMG what a sh!tshow!

 

I knew it would be ridiculous, but never in a million years would I have imagined this.

Welcome to the forum, scottytri. Good first post!!

Any updates on what's happening in that 12pm meeting?

They were streaming it at the Fishwarp

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2013/12/02/watch-live/

People said referencing the committee meeting in 2001 where Cranley  totally lost control was out of line. Apparently not.

Can someone just clarify for me:

 

Is is still our understanding that no matter what the counsel does today, they cannot stop construction for 30 days?  And that will give us time to get signatures for a referendum, right?

Can someone just clarify for me:

 

Is is still our understanding that no matter what the counsel does today, they cannot stop construction for 30 days?  And that will give us time to get signatures for a referendum, right?

 

We don't really know what tricks Cranley has up his sleeves until we see the ordinances. If they pass a regular ordinance, it can't take effect for 30 days. Some people have mentioned that Cranley may be trying to use some other tactics to prevent a referendum, such as passing multiple ordinances that would all need to be repealed, or attaching funding to the ordinance so that it isn't subject to a referendum.

Can someone just clarify for me:

 

Is is still our understanding that no matter what the counsel does today, they cannot stop construction for 30 days?  And that will give us time to get signatures for a referendum, right?

 

We (I) think that is true, but the full truth is no one knows. What is more "known" to be true is that repeal of the ordinance passed by the old council to continue construction on time would be subject to referendum. What is not known is what a law contradicting, but not repealing, that law would mean.

 

Might have to collect 11 sets of signatures for 11 ordinances.

From Twitter:  Streetcar mgr: Feds have put streetcar money on hold, waiting to see what city council does. @Local12

It doesn't sound like the council members have even been given the text of the ordinances yet.  How can they vote on something they haven't had time to familiarize themselves with yet?  Is there any way to enforce rules of order or something?

New council is on the ball . . . "Streetcar panel takes break while awaiting ordinances "

It doesn't sound like the council members have even been given the text of the ordinances yet.  How can they vote on something they haven't had time to familiarize themselves with yet?  Is there any way to enforce rules of order or something?

 

Apparently there are no rules because the full Council has not yet met to establish them.  Cranley was in today's meeting and said that "There are no rules", therefore the chair (Mann) gets to make them up.

From Twitter:  Streetcar mgr: Feds have put streetcar money on hold, waiting to see what city council does. @Local12

 

Would the Feds pull the money before a referendum?

^ They haven't pulled anything yet, but they have frozen the funds, pending the outcome of the Council meeting.  I don't know if they would pull them before the 30 days of signature gathering is up... I would hope not.  If so, we're sunk.

From Twitter:  Streetcar mgr: Feds have put streetcar money on hold, waiting to see what city council does. @Local12

 

Would the Feds pull the money before a referendum?

 

The city has not yet passed any ordinances and we have not yet breached any contracts. So I don't see how the Feds could pull any money yet.

Sounds like Cranley has gone full on Napoleon complex.

Apparently the fallout has already begun:

 

Jason Williams tweeted: Fed $ for @CincyStreetcar flows through @cincinnatimetro, which asked FTA to be reimbursed for $1.4M spent in Oct. Feds denied request.

It doesn't sound like the council members have even been given the text of the ordinances yet.  How can they vote on something they haven't had time to familiarize themselves with yet?  Is there any way to enforce rules of order or something?

 

Apparently there are no rules because the full Council has not yet met to establish them.  Cranley was in today's meeting and said that "There are no rules", therefore the chair (Mann) gets to make them up.

 

New rules get established with each new council?  I thought they'd just use Robert's Rules of Order or something else well-established.

 

If that's true, is it even permissible to have votes without rules being in place?  Isn't establishing those mandatory before moving on to actual business?

^ The City Solicitor said today that it is not a legal issue.  The Charter says that Council "may" enact rules, not "must" enact rules.

^Seems like the old rules would need to be in place until new rules are agreed upon then.

^ You would think so... But, according to Cranley, "There are no rules. It's not that complicated."

Messer kicked butt

Wow.  The feds are not effing around.  Is it possible that Metro will have suspend bus service over this fiasco?

Can someone tell me what prompted the study to determine cancellation costs, and why this wasn't performed prior to the election?  I think if done prior to the election we may have had a different outcome.

^ You would think so... But, according to Cranley, "There are no rules. It's not that complicated."

 

All hail El Presidente For Life John Cranley!!!  Cincinnati is officially a banana republic.

Wow.  The feds are not effing around.  Is it possible that Metro will have suspend bus service over this fiasco?

 

If they can't recover that money from the city, yes. $1.4 million is a significant sum. To put that into perspective, an express bus route linking downtown and a suburban park-n-ride a dozen miles away with 15-minute headways during rush hours can cost about $500,000 to $1 million per year.

 

This is interesting.......

 

Cindi Andrews ‏@cindiincincy  6m

Developer Rick Greiwe offers to be part of task force on spec impr dist 4 streetcar: Many biz leaders stand behind me to make this a success

Can someone tell me what prompted the study to determine cancellation costs, and why this wasn't performed prior to the election?  I think if done prior to the election we may have had a different outcome.

 

Because this would have to be paid for by the city.  The former city council wouldn't have wanted to spend money on this, as it would lend credence to the idea that Cincinnati can simply dump and run on its contracts, AND it would be more "wasted money" ammunition for the other side. 

One speaker for cancellation and she was kinda nuts.

I'm hearing that all 11 ordinances have appropriations attached, meaning they go into effect immediately and cannot be overturned through referendum.  Voting to begin soon...

Someone needs to get a good picture of Smithermann, Mann, and Winburn sitting next to each other.  That would be a great picture depicting our current "leaders of Cincinnati".

Can someone tell me what prompted the study to determine cancellation costs, and why this wasn't performed prior to the election?  I think if done prior to the election we may have had a different outcome.

 

Because this would have to be paid for by the city.  The former city council wouldn't have wanted to spend money on this, as it would lend credence to the idea that Cincinnati can simply dump and run on its contracts, AND it would be more "wasted money" ammunition for the other side. 

 

Thanks - though IMO it seemed that the majority of uniformed voters thought you could cancel it at no cost; the study at least showed how much it would cost to cancel and I think would have given many second thought.  But like you say, it would have been impossible for the former council to spend money on it.

I'm hearing that all 11 ordinances have appropriations attached, meaning they go into effect immediately and cannot be overturned through referendum.  Voting to begin soon...

 

So in other words, we are screwed?

First ordinance to come to a vote (from @ChrisCinciBiz):  1. Suspend spending on the streetcar project. Allocate $250,000 for an independent review of the costs of continuing the project. Repeal ordinance 392-2013, which I believe is the ordinance passed by the last council requiring the administration to complete.

 

I thought this was supposed to be about how much it would cost to cancel???

I'm hearing that all 11 ordinances have appropriations attached, meaning they go into effect immediately and cannot be overturned through referendum.  Voting to begin soon...

 

So in other words, we are screwed?

 

Are ordinances subject to referendum?

 

Via Nathaniel Livingston:

 

'Here's what the Charter says: "The initiative and referendum powers are reserved to the people of the city ON ALL QUESTIONS which THE COUNCIL IS AUTHORIZED TO CONTROL BY LEGISLATIVE ACTION; such powers shall be exercised in the manner provided by the laws of the state of Ohio." (Article II, Section 3)

 

A lie travels around the world before the truth gets her shoe on. Et tu @CityBeatCincy and German Lopez!? Quote from today's CityBeat: "[streetcar supporters are] threatening a referendum on any action council takes to pause or cancel the project, BUT SOME ARE CONCERNED COUNCIL WILL ATTACH A FUNDING MEASURE TO LEGISLATION THAT WOULD ALLOW A CANCELLATION OR PAUSE TO GO INTO EFFECT IMMEDIATELY, even if the project makes it onto the November 2014 ballot." Considering this lie has travelled around the world already it looks like I'll be forced to put my paralegal shoes back on.

 

The Charter doesn't say anything about Cincinnati voters losing the right of referendum because Council attaches a funding measure to legislation. It's written in plain English. If the Council is authorized to vote on something, the people have the power to challenge it by referendum. Have Cincy's news editors all gone on vacation at the same time!?! Who's fact checking these stories!!!

 

And who are these concerned people? Why didn't they keep their concerns to themselves? Should everyone thank Mike Moroski & crew for helping spread this bad information. Now not only is there a battle with people at City Hall putting out misinformation, we've now got to deal with friendly fire from people who are supposed to be on our side!!!) '

 

http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientId=19996&stateId=35&stateName=Ohio

^ I happily (and hopefully) stand corrected.

^ I happily (and hopefully) stand corrected.

 

I have no idea if its true or not...But its worth a shot

^  All Aboard Ohio just tweeted the same thing.  Here's hoping...

You'd have to get a judge to order a temporary injunction. Even with the referenda process, the ordinances would take effect immediately

Ryan Messer ‏@RyanMesser  15m

Interesting. John Deatrick answering questions by Council. Mayor Cranley leaves the meeting.  And to date -Mayor yet to meet w Deatrick

The "We Believe In Cincinnati" people sure seemed to believe that ordinances with spending attached could not be subjected to referendum. Even if they were, they still take effect immediately (meaning federal funding will be lost), and to overturn them, we'll need to collect 90,000 signatures and convince the majority of Cincinnatians to vote no on issues 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11.