The majority of the goddamn studies were about the downtown loop. The 3-to-1 ROI figure is for the downtown loop.

 

David Mann trying to make the Uptown Connector a part of the conversation when considering whether to go forward with the Downtown Loop is a red herring, and once again makes me question whether he is at all genuine about an objective analysis. The other issue is it seems like the ROI factor is being ignored or brushed aside, when it's extremely relevant. Even if you're skeptical of the projected ROI (which should be vetted in the current study, but I'm not sure it is not simply being ignored), the ROI for finishing is CERTAINLY much higher than the zero ROI from not finishing.

 

If this analysis is supposed to be independent & objective, they should hire transportation professionals & economists from outside the area. Not someone in the f*cking Cranley administration, who would obviously be no more objective than Deatrick, who they seem to think is biased but seems to me to be a reputable, honest, stand-up guy.

The majority of the goddamn studies were about the downtown loop. The 3-to-1 ROI figure is for the downtown loop.

 

David Mann trying to make the Uptown Connector a part of the conversation when considering whether to go forward with the Downtown Loop is a red herring, and once again makes me question whether he is at all genuine about an objective analysis. The other issue is it seems like the ROI factor is being ignored or brushed aside, when it's extremely relevant. Even if you're skeptical of the projected ROI (which should be vetted in the current study, but I'm not sure it is not simply being ignored), the ROI for finishing is CERTAINLY much higher than the zero ROI from not finishing.

 

If this analysis is supposed to be independent & objective, they should hire transportation professionals & economists from outside the area. Not someone in the f*cking Cranley administration, who would obviously be no more objective than Deatrick, who they seem to think is biased but seems to me to be a reputable, honest, stand-up guy.

 

I may not always agree with him but I personally believe David Mann is an honorable person, and not prone to the gamesmanship of a politician like Mayor Cranley.  The problem is that Mr. Mann doesn't know much about the streetcar, and so he may be relying on the mayor who after all served on council during its inception.

 

Ditto about everything else you said though. 

I don't get why he was against private money being used for the study and concurrent construction. And voting against his own question being answered??! Seems like Cranley is pulling strings.

 

I liked Mann while I was growing up in Clifton. He was integral to getting the Esquire back as a theater instead of being demolished. But I now get the sense he is out of touch, and symbolizes the old-school Cincy which has been in terminal decline.

I agree the uptown connector thing is definitely fishy.  I'm not sure what the strategy is, but it doesn't smell good. 

 

Also keep in mind that the 2.7 to 1 ROI ratio is the low conservative estimate.  It's also factoring in all costs and benefits, so that's the actual return to the city coffers through improved taxes.  To get that much back in taxes means BILLIONS of dollars of new development, improved land values, sales, and income.  Most road projects on the other hand use time savings in their benefits calculation, and in many cases the time savings make up 90+ percent of said benefits.  None of that is taxable, so if you rightly discount time savings from the benefits calculation of road projects then nearly everything we're building today is a net loss. 

Does that take into effect the tax breaks and other tax incentives we have been giving developers in OTR and downtown?

With road projects, they also don't factor in the dilution of people (tax dollars) per infrastructure mile effected by development the road project enables. Maintaining that infrastructure is not free or even cheap.

IMO, Uptown = Bait and Switch.

 

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong but, while there are plenty of individual Cliftonites who support the streetcar, I'm not aware of resounding institutional support from UC or any of the hospitals.  And they don't have to worry about their advocacy effecting the bottom line or alienating customers to the extent that P&G does, or Macy's, or Fifth Third Bank, etc., etc.

 

John Deatrick testified that he thought a Downtown circulator could succeed on its own.  One step at a time is prudent.  If David Mann is saying Uptown has to be considered in the equation I think we can presume that that's part of Mayor Cranley's strategy to kill the project.  Again, that's just my opinion.

 

Also, "moving the goal posts."

interesting...

Nervous.  Any updates John?  Feeling confident still?

Does that take into effect the tax breaks and other tax incentives we have been giving developers in OTR and downtown?

Good points, Sherman. While I still hope saner minds will prevail, I'm surprised given the presence of COAST in the background that a contingency "plan B" wasn't formulated to save the project in the event of such an unreal scenario as is now unfolding. This current administration's actions amounts to a hostile takeover of a viable community project. Since the rules for the game have been abruptly changed in the middle, I'll throw out an idea. (because I sincerely believe that the streetcar project is dead or at least mothballed; studies or no studies) Given that there is some visible corporate support for continuing the project, why couldn't a corporate created and sponsored rail transit authority step in and finish the project to operate the system with profitability in mind? $100 million is chump change for the multinational multi-billion dollar corporations based in Cincinnati. And they would not have to spend the money but could borrow the start up costs and if lucky get Govt. guarantees for the loan(s) which would make them low risk and very cheap to pay over 10 years or longer. The city could write off the costs of donating the already completed construction (which they will have to do anyway) and donate the streetcar assets to the new privatized transit business. (Conservatives love to privatize functions normally covered by local, state, and federal governments-from prisons to toll roads) Tax breaks like those given to developers might be the extra dollop of icing on the cake to create a strong enough incentive for private interests to pick up the pieces of this project and see it to completion. Fares might be a bit higher but if phase one is profitable, I could see the additions to the streetcar lines coming much sooner. The current city administration could take credit for saving taxpayers money and streetcar supporters while not overjoyed would still have their visionary streetcar. The current scenario almost for certain will kill the project indefinitely. (is anyone naïve enough to think the study will not recommend cancellation-or if inconclusive, will be delayed long enough for the Feds to yank funding?) There  needs a compromise which will let all parties on both sides of the issue walk away feeling they won something. Cab companies are private, Airlines are privately owned, why not a streetcar transit company which is privately owned and operated? Ok, I know there are a slew of arguments for why it won't work or prohibitive contractual obligations and limitations, etc.  But the only way this streetcar project will not be dead for at least the next 4 years and possibly forever is an alternative plan that is palatable to the current administration yet also completes the initial phase of the streetcar so the revenue questions can be put to a real world test. I think the real streetcar operations money is in connecting UC and Xavier students with the downtown and OTR. Corporations can also write off operating losses but I think if a logical business mindset towards the project were taken it should at least break even or be profitable. For Cincinnati's brand conscious companies the Streetcar could become a huge PR image trophy for the town's corporate interests.  (the biggest companies probably spend more than the costs of the streetcar project for annual advertising) Ok, I'm jumping back into the shadows but I sincerely feel for those who think the current administration will ever admit they were wrong and give the streetcar project a green light to completion. Maybe the previous mayor's signature project was the streetcar but the current one has made cancelling it his signature accomplishment.

^ I admit I didn't read your whole post, because I'm enthralled by the UC-Louisville football game. However, the problem with a corporate-funded system is that tax dollars are the way the city makes money off the project. Corporations can't collect taxes.

 

I'll read your whole post when I get a chance. Again, happy you're contributing. Keep it up :)

Nervous.  Any updates John?  Feeling confident still?

 

A lot of things in the works. And yes, I'm still confident we'll complete the streetcar.

I have to believe that a streetcar to uptown benefits UC tremendously.  Obviously some people involved in the project have had discussions with Santa Ono, yet he is very quiet (which isn't like him) on this subject.  Too many big players have been quiet on this.  But now it might be too little too late.  Business CEO's and local owners should have stepped up their support a long time ago, including UC and Santa Ono.

I have to believe that a streetcar to uptown benefits UC tremendously.  Obviously some people involved in the project have had discussions with Santa Ono, yet he is very quiet (which isn't like him) on this subject.  Too many big players have been quiet on this.  But now it might be too little too late.  Business CEO's and local owners should have stepped up their support a long time ago, including UC and Santa Ono.

 

Indeed, the absence of leadership on this critical Cincinnati issue should be noted by backers as much as the obviously regressive hegemony of John Cranley.

 

So one of the radio shows is saying the economic study of the ROI would only come about if all parts of the project were completed, not just the downtown portion. Any truth to this? Why would they be spreading this?

So one of the radio shows is saying the economic study of the ROI would only come about if all parts of the project were completed, not just the downtown portion. Any truth to this? Why would they be spreading this?

 

^ No evidence of this whatsoever.

So one of the radio shows is saying the economic study of the ROI would only come about if all parts of the project were completed, not just the downtown portion. Any truth to this? Why would they be spreading this?

 

^ No evidence of this whatsoever.

 

I hope Mann and flynn aren't falling for this carefully hatched misinformation campaign created by cranley,  smitherman coast and 700wlw

John Schneider-  Is there a way to get the word out in big bold letters in The Enquirer and anywhere we can about what cuts will be made to the city budget due to streetcar cancellation?  Any way to get police/fire to put pressure on city hall because paying debts for a non income generating project has got to jeopardize all sorts of other budget items?

I'd like to see

"Streetcar Cancellation Forces Safety Cuts"  " Council Eliminates Tracks and Cops With One Vote".

 

You get what I'm saying...

 

Call Cranley out on his fake fiscal conservatism.  Have PG quickly introduce an ordinance that states council will not cancel a project that creates debt without a plan in place to pay for that debt.  If it passes, great.  If it doesn't, people will see Cranley more clearly for what he is.

Call Cranley out on his fake fiscal conservatism.  Have PG quickly introduce an ordinance that states council will not cancel a project that creates debt without a plan in place to pay for that debt.  If it passes, great.  If it doesn't, people will see Cranley more clearly for what he is.

 

It's a great idea and definitely good pr. It won't pass but it makes the "fiscal conservatives" position even that much more ludicrous

 

All I know is sitting around waiting for an audit that may or may not be influenced by cranley is playing with fire. There is an active pr misinformation campaign out there to influence Mann and flynn.

 

700wlw will never show our side.  The Enquirer has publicly stated they want the project to be finished.  They are our ally.

 

Here's a quote I heard today:

 

"I've dealt with Cranley and City Hall. I can tell you right now they're laughing at the streetcar supporters and thinking the same thing I am: they're good at organizing rallies, talking big stuff to the media, and packing City Hall, but none of that matters in the long run if they can't influence the vote or do anything politically to hurt us."

Call Cranley out on his fake fiscal conservatism.  Have PG quickly introduce an ordinance that states council will not cancel a project that creates debt without a plan in place to pay for that debt.  If it passes, great.  If it doesn't, people will see Cranley more clearly for what he is.

 

Simpson may be a better choice to introduce something like that.  PG just switched over to supporting the streetcar, and I'm not sure how far he wants to stick his neck out for it.  I'm not sure that he's even technically a believer in the project; he sounds like he just understands that getting something is better than getting nothing.  Whichever it is, I'm happy to have him on board with finishing up phase 1A.

This is probably going to be unpopular on this board, but is there any possibility that this project could continue as simply the OTR loop?  That's the portion already under construction, that's where the streetcar barn is located, and it still connects Washington Park and Findlay Market to all of the neighborhood and shops in between.  If the only other alternative turns out to be complete cancellation, it might be something we want to consider.

^ Wouldn't scaling the project back that drastically jeopardize the Federal funds?

Call Cranley out on his fake fiscal conservatism.  Have PG quickly introduce an ordinance that states council will not cancel a project that creates debt without a plan in place to pay for that debt.  If it passes, great.  If it doesn't, people will see Cranley more clearly for what he is.

 

Simpson may be a better choice to introduce something like that.  PG just switched over to supporting the streetcar, and I'm not sure how far he wants to stick his neck out for it.  I'm not sure that he's even technically a believer in the project; he sounds like he just understands that getting something is better than getting nothing.  Whichever it is, I'm happy to have him on board with finishing up phase 1A.

 

That's why I said PG.  His switch was due to being conscious of the taxpayer dollar.  This would reinforce that move.  Also, Murray, Flynn, Mann et al would have that looming sound bite over their head next election cycle where they refused to be held accountable for the debts THEY created by voting this type of legislation down.

^ Wouldn't scaling the project back that drastically jeopardize the Federal funds?

 

Maybe.  But those weren't in danger of being revoked when Kasich stole funding from the project, temporarily shortening it to 5th street.  This is bigger than that, but the precedent is there.  Maybe we alter it to run to the casino instead of turning south to The Banks.  Still shorter than the current proposal, but perhaps long enough to save the federal funding.

 

I'm sure some things like rails are already paid for in full, but there would be a lot less labor, utility relocation, and materials (wire, stops, etc.).  This could also serve as a demonstration of why rail is different (in a great way) than rubber-tired buses.  It would give the opposing council members an "out" as an obvious compromise and might also stave off lawsuits by allowing the city to renegotiate contracts instead of breaching them.

 

If service is up and running, we will have an easier time getting extensions.  Starting over from scratch is a massive undertaking.

I highly doubt we could alter the route. We might be able to eliminate part of it, but not change the route to the casino or anything. We would likely need a new environmental study, new exploratory utility digs, etc. It would be a pretty large undertaking to shift the route at all IMO.

So one of the radio shows is saying the economic study of the ROI would only come about if all parts of the project were completed, not just the downtown portion. Any truth to this? Why would they be spreading this?

 

I caught the Brian Thomas interview with Mayor Cranely yesterday morning (Podcast) and I believe both said that the expected ROI (2.7-1) was dependent on the streetcar going to the zoo.

 

Also, just noticed Thomas has a "COUNTDOWN TO THE STREET CAR" widget on the left hand side of his blog page.

I highly doubt we could alter the route. We might be able to eliminate part of it, but not change the route to the casino or anything. We would likely need a new environmental study, new exploratory utility digs, etc. It would be a pretty large undertaking to shift the route at all IMO.

 

Understood.  Just thinking outside the box.  We might be able to get Horseshoe to kick in a little funding to reach the extra two blocks from the current southern turn. 

This is a full-on misinformation campaign, and the fact that Mann's Facebook post talks about success being possibly contingent upon the Uptown extension gives me a very bad feeling about his intention to listen to facts & reason.

I'm liking my own idea more and more...  lol.

 

After this is running, we propose "light rail from the west side directly to the stadiums". This would obviously be via connecting a light rail line to the small loop and completing the original "streetcar" loop which is built to light rail specs. It obliterates the arguments that "we're not investing in the neighborhoods" and that it "doesn't go anywhere" and finishes the original plan.

Anyone have any idea when we might hear from the Feds on their intentions regarding the funding?  Or is it more likely they will remain silent until after the audit is done? The silence is killing me...

This is a full-on misinformation campaign, and the fact that Mann's Facebook post talks about success being possibly contingent upon the Uptown extension gives me a very bad feeling about his intention to listen to facts & reason.

 

This is what scares me

So one of the radio shows is saying the economic study of the ROI would only come about if all parts of the project were completed, not just the downtown portion. Any truth to this? Why would they be spreading this?

 

I caught the Brian Thomas interview with Mayor Cranely yesterday morning (Podcast) and I believe both said that the expected ROI (2.7-1) was dependent on the streetcar going to the zoo.

 

Also, just noticed Thomas has a "COUNTDOWN TO THE STREET CAR" widget on the left hand side of his blog page.

 

Altering the route is out of the question.  The feds wouldn't go for that and I doubt council would either.  I think the most important thing we could do at this point is call out Cranley and Council on their mis-information like the notion that the 2.7-1 ROI is dependent on the uptown connector.  We need to back it up with facts and we need to get word out to everyone, including the media and all of the council members and Cranley himself.  We can not afford to let lies like that become fact simply because they go unopposed. 

Didn't the city alter the route after the state took the funds away but was able to keep the federal funds? They would not do it this time around.  You can only give someone so many chances.

After the state took funds away they truncated the line to end at Henry Street north of Findlay Market and go down to Govt Square. Then they got a new federal grant to expand the line to The Banks. This required a brand new environmental study I believe.

I highly doubt we could alter the route. We might be able to eliminate part of it, but not change the route to the casino or anything. We would likely need a new environmental study, new exploratory utility digs, etc. It would be a pretty large undertaking to shift the route at all IMO.

 

Understood.  Just thinking outside the box.  We might be able to get Horseshoe to kick in a little funding to reach the extra two blocks from the current southern turn. 

 

I hope that people who are spending time talking about fantasy future lines, and what went wrong in the past are spending as much, or more time focusing on the problem at hand RIGHT NOW.  That is We need more votes on council to stop Cranleys insidious assault on our future.  Call, email, write, post to Twitter, Facebook, business courier, enquirer, wcpo, wlwt, wlw, wkrc etc.    Explain how cancellation will waste taxpayer dollars.  Explain how unknown legal costs could bankrupt our city.  Naysayers are using the fear of unknown operating costs against us.  The fear of unknown litigation costs scares me a hell of a lot more.  Get that fear out there.  Get taxpayers angry that Cranley will be expsosing them to an untold deficit that can far exceed any operational costs.

He is saying you can't guarantee him the project won't bleed the city, despite the ROI studies.  People have to be made aware that he can't guarantee the city won't be bled dry by litigation costs. 

So one of the radio shows is saying the economic study of the ROI would only come about if all parts of the project were completed, not just the downtown portion. Any truth to this? Why would they be spreading this?

 

I caught the Brian Thomas interview with Mayor Cranely yesterday morning (Podcast) and I believe both said that the expected ROI (2.7-1) was dependent on the streetcar going to the zoo.

 

Also, just noticed Thomas has a "COUNTDOWN TO THE STREET CAR" widget on the left hand side of his blog page.

 

Altering the route is out of the question.  The feds wouldn't go for that and I doubt council would either.  I think the most important thing we could do at this point is call out Cranley and Council on their mis-information like the notion that the 2.7-1 ROI is dependent on the uptown connector.  We need to back it up with facts and we need to get word out to everyone, including the media and all of the council members and Cranley himself.  We can not afford to let lies like that become fact simply because they go unopposed. 

 

While I agree, I also have come to believe that the facts are not helping us.  They just flat out refuse to believe them.  So, while we do need the facts, we also need fear.  They are winning this argument based on fear.  Look at any great political win in all of history.  It's almost always a fear based victory.

 

We have to scare people about the reality of bankruptcy brought on by ongoing litigation from the cancellation of this project.  The energy and momentum of this city will come to a grinding halt as that energy is focused on fighting lawsuit after lawsuit for the foreseeable future, and even reaching out to ten years.  It took until 1966 to pay off the subway bonds.  We will have a similar burden with streetcar cancellation.  Now, throw in the reality of out litigious society, and we have a recipe for utter fiscal collapse for cincinnati. 

So one of the radio shows is saying the economic study of the ROI would only come about if all parts of the project were completed, not just the downtown portion. Any truth to this? Why would they be spreading this?

 

I caught the Brian Thomas interview with Mayor Cranely yesterday morning (Podcast) and I believe both said that the expected ROI (2.7-1) was dependent on the streetcar going to the zoo.

 

Also, just noticed Thomas has a "COUNTDOWN TO THE STREET CAR" widget on the left hand side of his blog page.

 

Altering the route is out of the question.  The feds wouldn't go for that and I doubt council would either.  I think the most important thing we could do at this point is call out Cranley and Council on their mis-information like the notion that the 2.7-1 ROI is dependent on the uptown connector.  We need to back it up with facts and we need to get word out to everyone, including the media and all of the council members and Cranley himself.  We can not afford to let lies like that become fact simply because they go unopposed. 

 

While I agree, I also have come to believe that the facts are not helping us.  They just flat out refuse to believe them.  So, while we do need the facts, we also need fear.  They are winning this argument based on fear.  Look at any great political win in all of history.  It's almost always a fear based victory.

 

We have to scare people about the reality of bankruptcy brought on by ongoing litigation from the cancellation of this project.  The energy and momentum of this city will come to a grinding halt as that energy is focused on fighting lawsuit after lawsuit for the foreseeable future, and even reaching out to ten years.  It took until 1966 to pay off the subway bonds.  We will have a similar burden with streetcar cancellation.  Now, throw in the reality of out litigious society, and we have a recipe for utter fiscal collapse for cincinnati.

 

THIS.

 

 

Something I haven't seen addressed is what will happen to the streetcar infrastructure that is already in place if the project is cancelled, especially in the areas where the work is only partially completed and the streets are torn up. Is there a plan? I assume there is no plan, but the costs of putting the streets back into a usable condition should also be considered in any cost analysis.

So one of the radio shows is saying the economic study of the ROI would only come about if all parts of the project were completed, not just the downtown portion. Any truth to this? Why would they be spreading this?

 

I caught the Brian Thomas interview with Mayor Cranely yesterday morning (Podcast) and I believe both said that the expected ROI (2.7-1) was dependent on the streetcar going to the zoo.

 

Also, just noticed Thomas has a "COUNTDOWN TO THE STREET CAR" widget on the left hand side of his blog page.

 

Altering the route is out of the question.  The feds wouldn't go for that and I doubt council would either.  I think the most important thing we could do at this point is call out Cranley and Council on their mis-information like the notion that the 2.7-1 ROI is dependent on the uptown connector.  We need to back it up with facts and we need to get word out to everyone, including the media and all of the council members and Cranley himself.  We can not afford to let lies like that become fact simply because they go unopposed. 

 

While I agree, I also have come to believe that the facts are not helping us.  collapse for cincinnati. 

 

Facts work against it, because this is a culture war. 

 

All of the arguments about young professionals have been a disaster.  Old people HATE being told what to think by younger people, and old people vote in EVERY election. 

 

Cranley and Kincaid are absolutely laughing at all of you, especially those who at this late hour keep dragging out the young professionals and new condominium arguments. 

 

People forget that in 2007, when the Blue Ash Airport money was first allocated to the streetcar, and the project became "real", there was ABSOLUTLY NOTHING IN OTR.  Washington Park was still a mess, police had to guard the first 3cdc construction sites.

 

 

I hope that people who are spending time talking about fantasy future lines, and what went wrong in the past are spending as much, or more time focusing on the problem at hand RIGHT NOW.  That is We need more votes on council to stop Cranleys insidious assault on our future.  Call, email, write, post to Twitter, Facebook, business courier, enquirer, wcpo, wlwt, wlw, wkrc etc.    Explain how cancellation will waste taxpayer dollars.  Explain how unknown legal costs could bankrupt our city.  Naysayers are using the fear of unknown operating costs against us.  The fear of unknown litigation costs scares me a hell of a lot more.  Get that fear out there.  Get taxpayers angry that Cranley will be expsosing them to an untold deficit that can far exceed any operational costs.

He is saying you can't guarantee him the project won't bleed the city, despite the ROI studies.  People have to be made aware that he can't guarantee the city won't be bled dry by litigation costs. 

 

I don't disagree with you.  But we also need to look at unexplored possibilities. We need a plan in place for what we do if we can't get those votes. An OTR only loop (if even possible) still gives us a lot of what we want, as well as a platform for expansion. A compromise in scope/price may be a way to flip one council member.  Believe me, I want the FULL line.  I'm talking about a plan b, so that we are looking at a 4 year hiatus instead of the death of the whole plan.

This might be a stupid idea or completely unrealistic, but what are the odds of us getting Mann and Flynn out to Portland while the study is being done? I'm sure we could raise enough money so that it doesn't come at the expense of tax dollars.

 

I love this idea.  Go all out.  Fancy hotel, nice meal, etc.  Seeing Portland's streetcar in action may do the trick, but a little schmoozing never hurt anyone either.  Maybe take the whole city council out there if enough funding can be obtained. 

Facts work against it, because this is a culture war. 

 

All of the arguments about young professionals have been a disaster.  Old people HATE being told what to think by younger people, and old people vote in EVERY election. 

yup

The locals, older voters, poorer voters, tradeswork voters don't want young people, professionals or outsiders in their city and they don't want them voting. They don't want to lose their dumping ground - OTR. They don't want to lose their slice of the pie.

Cincinnati blog did an analysis of the voters along age lines.

http://cincinnati.blogspot.com/2013/12/old-cincinnati-voted-last-month.html

So one of the radio shows is saying the economic study of the ROI would only come about if all parts of the project were completed, not just the downtown portion. Any truth to this? Why would they be spreading this?

 

I caught the Brian Thomas interview with Mayor Cranely yesterday morning (Podcast) and I believe both said that the expected ROI (2.7-1) was dependent on the streetcar going to the zoo.

 

Also, just noticed Thomas has a "COUNTDOWN TO THE STREET CAR" widget on the left hand side of his blog page.

 

Altering the route is out of the question.  The feds wouldn't go for that and I doubt council would either.  I think the most important thing we could do at this point is call out Cranley and Council on their mis-information like the notion that the 2.7-1 ROI is dependent on the uptown connector.  We need to back it up with facts and we need to get word out to everyone, including the media and all of the council members and Cranley himself.  We can not afford to let lies like that become fact simply because they go unopposed. 

 

While I agree, I also have come to believe that the facts are not helping us.  collapse for cincinnati. 

 

Facts work against it, because this is a culture war. 

 

All of the arguments about young professionals have been a disaster.  Old people HATE being told what to think by younger people, and old people vote in EVERY election. 

 

Cranley and Kincaid are absolutely laughing at all of you, especially those who at this late hour keep dragging out the young professionals and new condominium arguments. 

 

People forget that in 2007, when the Blue Ash Airport money was first allocated to the streetcar, and the project became "real", there was ABSOLUTLY NOTHING IN OTR.  Washington Park was still a mess, police had to guard the first 3cdc construction sites.

 

 

Jake, you're brilliant in many ways and I very much admire your talents and knowledge.  You are correct that old people vote more consistently/reliably than young people.  But there have been lots of old people in attendance at the many City Hall hearings over the years, and indeed many Empty Nesters/Baby Boomers account for the increase in downtown's population, like in my census tract which gained 33%.  While some of us old people may cringe at petulant-toned testimony of certain young people who essentially say to council members that if they don't get what they want they're moving, we nevertheless understand that for a city to grow and be vibrant, it must be appealing and welcoming to young people.  Having said that, I'll never forget seeing the greying Tom Brinkman of COAST on TV news a couple of years ago, saying in dramatically somber tones, that "Cincinnati is a dying city".  If it is, it can rightly be blamed on the efforts of people like him who are working to kill it.  So while I can appreciate the sentiment in your remarks, don't forget that there are also young opponents. 

 

Many who are working the hardest and most effectively in support of the streetcar are "old people".  Please try to remember that comments smacking of ageism can be demoralizing. 

 

 

Not all of the 60+ crowd hang in the retirement home resenting the fact that their kids do not visit them often. I had the pleasure of hearing many great speakers from the older crowd testifying in support of the streetcar this week. The opposition is trying to pin the streetcar as a toy for the hipster youth of OTR but the reality is that the streetcar is for all ages.

  Having said that, I'll never forget seeing the greying Tom Brinkman of COAST on TV news a couple of years ago, saying in dramatically somber tones, that "Cincinnati is a dying city".

 

 

 

trying to create a self-fulfilling prophecy

 

 

yup

The locals, older voters, poorer voters, tradeswork voters don't want young people, professionals or outsiders in their city and they don't want them voting. They don't want to lose their dumping ground - OTR. They don't want to lose their slice of the pie.

Cincinnati blog did an analysis of the voters along age lines.

http://cincinnati.blogspot.com/2013/12/old-cincinnati-voted-last-month.html

Comments like this make streetcar supporters seem like a myopic bunch. To broadly dismiss older people (the younger people of the relatively recent past), poor people, and workers in the trades (some of whom were until recently at work building the streetcar) is absurd. These are all groups of people that would benefit from the streetcar itself and the stronger public transit system that the streetcar would build support for.

 

If the streetcar has been promoted only as a tool for attracting younger professionals (the older professionals of the not-too-distant future), it's no wonder it hasn't achieved broader support. It makes the streetcar seem like a frivolity for the entertainment of the sought after and the entitled, rather than a good way for many different kinds of people to get around.

 

yup

The locals, older voters, poorer voters, tradeswork voters don't want young people, professionals or outsiders in their city and they don't want them voting. They don't want to lose their dumping ground - OTR. They don't want to lose their slice of the pie.

Cincinnati blog did an analysis of the voters along age lines.

http://cincinnati.blogspot.com/2013/12/old-cincinnati-voted-last-month.html

Comments like this make streetcar supporters seem like a myopic bunch. To broadly dismiss older people (the younger people of the relatively recent past), poor people, and workers in the trades (some of whom were until recently at work building the streetcar) is absurd. These are all groups of people that would benefit from the streetcar itself and the stronger public transit system that the streetcar would build support for.

 

If the streetcar has been promoted only as a tool for attracting younger professionals (the older professionals of the not-too-distant future), it's no wonder it hasn't achieved broader support. It makes the streetcar seem like a frivolity for the entertainment of the sought after and the entitled, rather than a good way for many different kinds of people to get around.

You guys are so friggin' simple. Is it really that black & white in your worlds?

You do know how old Cranley & Qualls are, right?

I understand that the events of the last few days has everyone abuzz but I think people need to stay the course and not engage in the chatter I'm seeing now. You can be sure your adversaries are reading everything and are taking satisfaction in your disarray.

 

I respectfully suggest that there be NO retreat from the current plan. I also suggest that you should not be distracted by suggestions that the line be truncated or extended or by discussions about demographics. We have a winner in the current proposal which will generate much new economic activity. Let's stick with that.

 

Yes, talk about strategic moves---privately. It might be a good idea to shut down this thread, except for two or three people to keep others posted on developments that can be disclosed publicly. Our enemies should not be allowed to peer in at our thoughts.

What the hell is Rob Portman talking about now? The streetcar was never good use of federal money