I'm shocked that more people didn't use the video of his dim witted leadership prior to the riots, it was downright stupid to vote for such a leader downright stupid.

Did anybody see the survey in the Cincinnati Business Courier.  I have been checking it for the past hour now and while many more people have voted in the survey, the percentages have stayed the same.

 

What should the city do with the streetcar project?

 

Finish it: 83%

Kill it: 16%

I don't care: 1%

 

Votes cast: 690

 

I'm shocked that more people didn't use the video of his dim witted leadership prior to the riots, it was downright stupid to vote for such a leader downright stupid.

 

Chabot used it to fend off his two challenges to his congressional seat.  Qualls didn't repeat what worked for Chabot and got stomped. 

I think regardless of how good her campaign was run, Cranley was going to win. He was going to win the passionately anti-streetcar and anti-parking people (which was pretty high). He was also going to win about 90%+ of the Republican vote, and split the Democrat vote regardless of how much dirt or how right Roxanne was. I don't see her winning in any situation against those coalitions.

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2013/12/03/seeds-of-first-streetcar-lawsuit-planted.html?page=all

Seeds of first streetcar lawsuit planted

A Pendleton resident wants Cincinnati’s solicitor to ask the Ohio Ethics Commission to investigate whether Councilman Christopher Smitherman had or has a conflict of interest when voting on streetcar ordinances.

The taxpayer demand letter by P. Casey Coston to City Solicitor John Curp sets the stage for what could be the first lawsuit over the project’s potential cancellation.

P.G. speaking out again.  This is all I'm asking for in an elected official...Intelligent decision making.  I truly don't understand how the rest of council is seeing this any differently than P.G.  There must be something else going on behind closed doors that is forcing them to be so irrational.

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20131203/EDIT02/312030070/P-G-Sittenfeld-Why-m-streetcar?gcheck=1&nclick_check=1

^Agreed.  I hope he's working behind the scenes on this. 

Any truth to the rumor that the "assassination threat" was given by an "opposition plant?"

Any truth to the rumor that the "assassination threat" was given by an "opposition plant?"

 

Never heard of that guy.  I couldn't find the Facebook page he posted from.  Did he hide his page or did he delete it?  Was he a real person?

I've heard it was a plant from COAST.  He never posted on anything I saw before, made those outrageous comments, and then disappeared. 

 

Just moments later, Charlie Norman had a screenshot and tweeted it to all the media

 

 

I've heard it was a plant from COAST.  He never posted on anything I saw before, made those outrageous comments, and then disappeared. 

 

Just moments later, Charlie Norman had a screenshot and tweeted it to all the media

 

Moderator's note: This is a real person and I personally doubt it was a plant. I don't think it is worth digging up his whole history here. If anyone wants to have private converstations about who he is that is fine, but I don't think it would be appropriate to discuss his personal life on this board. It is not directly pertinent to the converstation. Unless there are news articles that discuss it or charges filed, I don't think this should really be discussed. Thanks!

Keep communicating with allies and potential allies.  I have received several replies of thanks back from the Haile Foundation already for recognizing their willingness to seek sensible solutions.  Keep communicating keep communicating....don't give up!

As many had expected, the confidential memo in the Duke case this summer stated Cincinnati would likely lose the case, citing a Supreme Court ruling in 1930. Not sure if any more recent rulings have overturned that precedent. Also not sure how WCPO got a copy of the memo or if it is legal to describe it since a court ruled it was confidential and couldn't be released. Though I'm sure WCPO vetted their lawyers to make sure they could release it.

 

http://www.wcpo.com/news/political/local-politics/confidential-memo-cincinnati-likely-to-pay-all-costs-for-moving-utilities-for-streetcar

I'm willing to bet it was someone in the new administration. Likely someone working with the new mayor.

So the new administration wants to gamble an additional $15m in order to embarrass the previous administration. Smart. Classy.

The price in money, lost jobs, lost fire and police is irrelevant to them.  Cincinnati is being Cranley'd.

If you read about the rise of Rob Ford in Toronto, it is interesting how many parallels you can draw to the rise of John Cranley. 

If the streetcar goes down, the people you should be blaming are the last council and Mallory.  People refuse to deal with the fact that Mr. Cranley would not have the power to kill the project if the polls did not show that the streetcar is unpopular outside of OTR and downtown.  The previous mayor and council did not make the case to the neighborhoods, period.  Neighborhoods have helped pay for stadiums, Fountain Square update, and the new Washington Park recently.  Everyone benefits from these projects (which we should benefit since we all pay taxes).  However, my question is, how much is enough for downtown, and when do we start working in the other neighborhoods?  I don't think for one second that Westwood would begrudge a development project for Bond Hill.  However, when one area (downtown/OTR) starts getting all the most notable development projects, other neighborhoods do start taking notice, and it does become a neighborhood vs. neighborhood issue.

 

We have too much crime/ shootings in this city.  The last administration could have at least tried to require every major streetcar contractor to offer construction apprentice opportunities to some of the young men in these troubled neighborhoods while building the streetcar.  Such a program probably would have led to more buy in in the neighborhoods, especially the black community.  The project should only move forward if the cost to cancel is independently shown to be very close to the cost to complete.....

What? You don't run a city scared of what some other candidate would do. If you live in the city Dave you will pay for it.

If the streetcar goes down, the people you should be blaming are the last council and Mallory. 

That sentence makes no sense whatsoever, but neither does this whole situation. The voters had two previous opportunities to indirectly state their belief that downtown has had enough investment by voting against the streetcar project, and, in those situations, when the streetcar was explicitly on the ballot, they voted in favor of it.

 

Are you the same person as DAVEINCINTI?

^^^Viewing this from afar (Cleveland) I guess I am a bit confused if what you say is true (that only Downtown and OTR support the streetcar).  If that is the case how did it survive two attempts to de-rail the project by city wide initiatives.  Does the population of downtown and OTR so far exceed the rest of the city that they were able to overcome the anti street car vote?

The last administration could have at least tried to require every major streetcar contractor to offer construction apprentice opportunities to some of the young men in these troubled neighborhoods while building the streetcar.  Such a program probably would have led to more buy in in the neighborhoods, especially the black community.  The project should only move forward if the cost to cancel is independently shown to be very close to the cost to complete.....

 

Cranley could have included minority contractors on his Incline Village project...but the media never called him out on it, or anything else.  Cranley operates with impunity. 

People here keep glossing over the fact the previous referendums might have hindered/killed ALL rail projects in Cinti.  That was a major point that was made repeatedly by streetcar supporters in their commercials on.  I did not support ballot issues that could impede all rail projects, so I also voted the first issue down.  Also, many voters complained that the wording was not clear, especially the first time (Yes/No did not mean exactly what some believed).  I strongly feel that a clear yes or no vote on this streetcar project (not ALL rail projects) will allow the issue to be soundly rejected.  Cranley, Winburn, and others who have polled residents on the issue know it is clearly unpopular.  They are not concerned in the least about a referendum issue that is clearly and narrowly written just to deal with this one project....

What polls are you referring to? I've not seen anything like that. Also, what do you mean they're not concerned about a referendum? They're explicitly trying to block that possibility.

People here keep glossing over the fact the previous referendums might have hindered/killed ALL rail projects in Cinti. 

What do you mean by ALL rail projects in Citi? If the current one is left unfinished, there are not likely to be others.

Also if someone didn't know what they were voting for yes or no. They shouldn't even be voting.

What polls are you referring to? I've not seen anything like that. Also, what do you mean they're not concerned about a referendum? They're explicitly trying to block that possibility.

 

Winburn stated today that his scientific polling showed that 72% did not support this project.  If you don't think that Cranley did not poll test this issue when he basically made it the centerpiece of his campaign, you are not dealing with how politicians get elected.  Cranley knew that he would win Cinti Republicans, conservative Democrats, and the black community on this issue (and therefore, he would win the election).  That is exactly what happened on election day.....

 

Projects this big require coalition/consensus building to make them into a reality.  Where was that work done by the last council, especially in the black community?  You guys are very close to winning this on a TKO because of the money already spent; but, that is not the way to get a major project done.....

Winburn's "scientific polling" is knocking on random doors in the neighborhoods of his constituency.

Also if someone didn't know what they were voting for yes or no. They shouldn't even be voting.

 

I hardly know where to begin.  Maybe we should require a reading/literacy test, like the ones that were used to exclude blacks from voting in the South?  I hope that other city residents are reading these comments, since they show the arrogance that some streetcar supporters feel versus their fellow city residents.....

If you read about the rise of Rob Ford in Toronto, it is interesting how many parallels you can draw to the rise of John Cranley. 

 

I made a Facebook post about this the week before he took office.  We will be in the national spotlight at some point.

Also if someone didn't know what they were voting for yes or no. They shouldn't even be voting.

 

I hardly know where to begin.  Maybe we should require a reading/literacy test, like the ones that were used to exclude blacks from voting in the South?  I hope that other city residents are reading these comments, since they show the arrogance that some streetcar supporters feel versus their fellow city residents.....

 

Wow. You're dragging race into this? He was just stating that voters should know what they're voting on. Not exactly controversial.

DAVEINCINTI is a troll.

 

The "yes means no" argument is completely moronic. It relies on the assumption that the people who wanted to vote "no" (against the streetcar) but voted "yes" outnumber the people who wanted to vote "yes" (for the streetcar) but voted "no," which is essentially an argument that streetcar opponents are stupider than streetcar proponents. It also ignores the fact that the people who drafted the initiative (who came up with the language to be used) were the leaders of the opposition -- which means, if anything, the language was designed to trick people into voting for the measures (e.g. by including the word "streetcar" in an initiative which was much broader).

 

The argument that Mallory did not make the case for the streetcar is moronic. It relies on the assumption that the local media did not spin their coverage, to make the streetcar controversial, to increase readership, to increase revenue. Which is 100% disingenuous.

 

DAVEINCINTI might as well be banned from this board for trolling. He is trying to arouse emotions from people using arguments he knows to be bullsh!t.

All of these topics have been addressed...please do not feed the guest.....I think we should try to stay on topic of how to move forward. 

 

I keep thinking that Flynn will somehow see the light or at least be spooked by the fact that Feds have already frozen money.  Does anyone know if all of the new members have their email accounts up?  I assume his is [email protected] and want to try another address.

"What we know is that the costs to continue are at least $100 million on the capital side and at least $120 million on the operating side over the next 30 years. "

 

Hmmmmm  Really? Are they talking budgets here? Capital and Operating?

Amy Murray: Why I voted to pause the streetcar

 

The streetcar project was a major priority of the previous Cincinnati administration and council. The voters made it clear on election day that their priority is different than that of our predecessors.

 

The prior administration spent $35 million on the streetcar and escalated that spending after the election. Their actions are inexcusable. We are stopping the spending immediately out of respect for the taxpayers until we can re-evaluate the project.

 

The question now is simple: Is the cost of cancellation greater than the cost of continuation? What we know is that the costs to continue are at least $100 million on the capital side and at least $120 million on the operating side over the next 30 years. I wish the previous council hadn’t dug us into a hole. But the first thing we have to do is stop the spending until we can get the analysis completed...

DAVEINCINTI is a troll.

 

The "yes means no" argument is completely moronic. It relies on the assumption that the people who wanted to vote "no" (against the streetcar) but voted "yes" outnumber the people who wanted to vote "yes" (for the streetcar) but voted "no," which is essentially an argument that streetcar opponents are stupider than streetcar proponents. It also ignores the fact that the people who drafted the initiative (who came up with the language to be used) were the leaders of the opposition -- which means, if anything, the language was designed to trick people into voting for the measures (e.g. by including the word "streetcar" in an initiative which was much broader).

 

The argument that Mallory did not make the case for the streetcar is moronic. It relies on the assumption that the local media did not spin their coverage, to make the streetcar controversial, to increase readership, to increase revenue. Which is 100% disingenuous.

 

DAVEINCINTI might as well be banned from this board for trolling. He is trying to arouse emotions from people using arguments he knows to be bullsh!t.

 

You can call me all the names you want.  It only shows any neutral readers on this issue where you are coming from, so bring your so-called insults on if it makes you feel better.  Maybe you are one of these precious " young professionals" we have heard so much about (with emphasis on the "young" in that, since you think words like troll get you anywhere).  I also assume you are young, because you don't seem to understand how elections happen.  Cranley used the streetcar as his central issue because he knew it would sink Qualls.  How else could he have soundly defeated a very popular Democrat who consistently was the top vote taker in numerous council elections.  You can blame the media all you want, but Mallory knows the black community and its leaders very well, so he could have bypassed the media to make a case for the streetcar directly with them.  In fact, a black mayor, black city manager, and black majority on council certainly could have made their way to the black community to sell this project to them had they taken the time to do so.  They were not going to win over Repubs and conservative Dems, but they could have at least neutralized this issue in the black community had they taken the time to do so....

 

I heard voters on black talk radio state repeatedly that they did fully not understand the ballot language, no matter who wrote it.  Others were concerned (just as I was) that the way the referendums were presented, future rail projects that might be proposed could also be hindered.  This point was made repeatedly by your side.  Those commercials never did directly take on  this project. 

 

If the streetcar is as popular as you folks think (and I think you are living in a bubble where you can't take other opinions, which is why you call people who don't agree with you names), how on earth did the Cinti elect a mayor by a landslide who stated repeatedly and loudly that his first order of business would be to kill the streetcar?  I think you guys are really blind to what is going on with this issue.....

^As I've mentioned before:

 

In the 2009 race, Mallory (black Democrat) received 54% of the vote against Brad Wenstrup (white Republican) during his reelection campaign. Cranley used the two wedge issues to get the passionate voters on his side (anti streetcar and anti parking lease). With 46% of the votes on your side (Republicans), the angry voters on your side (not the streetcar supporters who were largely complacent and didn't think the streetcar could be stopped), and a split Democratic Party who refused to endorse the race, how could you lose if you are Cranley?

If the streetcar goes down, the people you should be blaming are the last council and Mallory.  People refuse to deal with the fact that Mr. Cranley would not have the power to kill the project if the polls did not show that the streetcar is unpopular outside of OTR and downtown.  The previous mayor and council did not make the case to the neighborhoods, period.  Neighborhoods have helped pay for stadiums, Fountain Square update, and the new Washington Park recently.  Everyone benefits from these projects (which we should benefit since we all pay taxes).  However, my question is, how much is enough for downtown, and when do we start working in the other neighborhoods?  I don't think for one second that Westwood would begrudge a development project for Bond Hill.  However, when one area (downtown/OTR) starts getting all the most notable development projects, other neighborhoods do start taking notice, and it does become a neighborhood vs. neighborhood issue.

 

We have too much crime/ shootings in this city.  The last administration could have at least tried to require every major streetcar contractor to offer construction apprentice opportunities to some of the young men in these troubled neighborhoods while building the streetcar.  Such a program probably would have led to more buy in in the neighborhoods, especially the black community.  The project should only move forward if the cost to cancel is independently shown to be very close to the cost to complete.....

 

I have seen a number of the "West side activists" complain about investment happening in uptown and on the east side. They're not just upset about downtown development.

 

I will stop myself from going on a rant about how the west side rejects investment and then get upset that the city isn't investing in the west side.

I really wish someone would call out those voting against the streetcar if it costs more to complete than to cancel - it's as if no one sees how ludicrous the notion is.  Either we spend a little more to complete and then get a return on our investment or we flush over $100M down the drain - this is fiscal responsibility?

My prediction: If the streetcar is cancelled, the cost of cancellation will be greater that the cost of actually completing the system and operating it for a decade.

I really wish someone would call out those voting against the streetcar if it costs more to complete than to cancel - it's as if no one sees how ludicrous the notion is.  Either we spend a little more to complete and then get a return on our investment or we flush over $100M down the drain - this is fiscal responsibility?

Oh you forgot the $120 million to operate it over 30 years that they are starting to hammer into peoples heads.

DAVEINCINTI is a troll.

 

The "yes means no" argument is completely moronic. It relies on the assumption that the people who wanted to vote "no" (against the streetcar) but voted "yes" outnumber the people who wanted to vote "yes" (for the streetcar) but voted "no," which is essentially an argument that streetcar opponents are stupider than streetcar proponents. It also ignores the fact that the people who drafted the initiative (who came up with the language to be used) were the leaders of the opposition -- which means, if anything, the language was designed to trick people into voting for the measures (e.g. by including the word "streetcar" in an initiative which was much broader).

 

The argument that Mallory did not make the case for the streetcar is moronic. It relies on the assumption that the local media did not spin their coverage, to make the streetcar controversial, to increase readership, to increase revenue. Which is 100% disingenuous.

 

DAVEINCINTI might as well be banned from this board for trolling. He is trying to arouse emotions from people using arguments he knows to be bullsh!t.

 

You can call me all the names you want.  It only shows any neutral readers on this issue where you are coming from, so bring your so-called insults on if it makes you feel better.  Maybe you are one of these precious " young professionals" we have heard so much about (with emphasis on the "young" in that, since you think words like troll get you anywhere).  I also assume you are young, because you don't seem to understand how elections happen.  Cranley used the streetcar as his central issue because he knew it would sink Qualls.  How else could he have soundly defeated a very popular Democrat who consistently was the top vote taker in numerous council elections.  You can blame the media all you want, but Mallory knows the black community and its leaders very well, so he could have bypassed the media to make a case for the streetcar directly with them.  In fact, a black mayor, black city manager, and black majority on council certainly could have made their way to the black community to sell this project to them had they taken the time to do so.  They were not going to win over Repubs and conservative Dems, but they could have at least neutralized this issue in the black community had they taken the time to do so....

 

I heard voters on black talk radio state repeatedly that they did fully not understand the ballot language, no matter who wrote it.  Others were concerned (just as I was) that the way the referendums were presented, future rail projects that might be proposed could also be hindered.  This point was made repeatedly by your side.  Those commercials never did directly take on  this project. 

 

If the streetcar is as popular as you folks think (and I think you are living in a bubble where you can't take other opinions, which is why you call people who don't agree with you names), how on earth did the Cinti elect a mayor by a landslide who stated repeatedly and loudly that his first order of business would be to kill the streetcar?  I think you guys are really blind to what is going on with this issue.....

 

The Issue 9 yard signs clearly said "STOP THE STREETCAR".  The Issue 48 ballot language contained the word "streetcar".  The streetcar project was the motivations for both ballot issues.  Issue 9 was also an attempt to prevent 3C's rail from entering Cincinnati City Limits.  Ohio's form of ballot proceedure requires that any charter amendment must be a "yes" vote.  So any charter amendment aimed to block something must be a "Yes means No".  OVER AND OVER AGAIN, SMITHERMAN TRICKED PEOPLE INTO THINKING MALLORY CREATED THAT MINIMALLY CONFUSING SITUATION. In fact Mallory could not do it if he wanted to. 

 

You're suggesting that thousands of people were confused by this message?:

 

 

 

Full memo about Duke relocation is up on the Enquirer's website and can be found below

 

http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/881890/streetcarutilitymemo.pdf

 

The last section titled: Statutory and Franchise Fees as a Method of Cost Recovery is something I found interesting. There is a precedent for the city to charge Duke to use the public ROW that they don't currently do. The memo essentially said at the end that there may be a way to recover the costs by actually charging Duke for the privilege of using the ROW for their lines.

...and my long lost friend from Milwaukee just messaged me on Facebook and said, "What's going on down there in Cincinnati?  You're canceling your streetcar?"

 

Word is spreading quickly.  This is so embarrassing. 

^As I've mentioned before:

 

In the 2009 race, Mallory (black Democrat) received 54% of the vote against Brad Wenstrup (white Republican) during his reelection campaign. Cranley used the two wedge issues to get the passionate voters on his side (anti streetcar and anti parking lease). With 46% of the votes on your side (Republicans), the angry voters on your side (not the streetcar supporters who were largely complacent and didn't think the streetcar could be stopped), and a split Democratic Party who refused to endorse the race, how could yo lose if you are Cranley?

 

This is what I mean.  Anyone who suggests Cinti is 46% Repub has not lived in this city for very long.  Why would Repubs not even run a candidate for mayor in a city that was even close to 46% Repub?  Mallory barely won in his last race because he lost a significant chunk of his Dem support....

 

Parking did play into the Cranley election, but everyone who followed the race knew from the start that the streetcar was the marquee issue.  The parking issue was a late gift to Cranley, but Qualls was already well on track to lose the race by then.  Parking was the icing, but the streetcar was the cake that brought us Cranley....

Question for you, DAVEINCITI: why did the Enquirer endorse Cranley?

I really wish someone would call out those voting against the streetcar if it costs more to complete than to cancel - it's as if no one sees how ludicrous the notion is.  Either we spend a little more to complete and then get a return on our investment or we flush over $100M down the drain - this is fiscal responsibility?

 

I've made this point to anti streetcar people.  They just do not effing understand this very simple math problem.  What in the eff is going on?  What did Cranley put in the water system around here?  LUNACY.

EDITORIAL: Pausing same as killing it

 

Seems like a very rushed Editorial, but I will take all of the support we can get on the streetcar.

For people, like me, who have been boycotting and avoiding reading the Enquirer, I will mention that they have been presenting rational discussion of, and even support for, the streetcar project over the past few days. I am reading the paper again, and I urge you to do so. Reward the positive and punish the negative.

^This is the correct message to send the local media and the new city council.  We're not grudge holders.  If you support us, we'll support you.  All that we ask for is reason and intellectual honesty.