Not to be entirely ignorant, but is there a streetcar system in Cinci?  It seems crazy you guys have managed to create 100 forum pages and I see an article several pages earlier talking about the potential of still funding one.

 

We do not have a streetcar system currently...but we are in the final stages of potentially approving the construction of one.  If we had a system in place I would say that the discussion on here wouldn't be nearly as much...but since we're trying to get one built it is another story.

 

People are discussing their ideas/thoughts/concerns on the route(s), design, functionality, etc.  The bottom line is that there is a lot to discuss, just as there is with any proposed construction project on this forum.

I've only been able to catch a few minutes of the hearing on CitiCable, but heard Monzel say something about putting it to a vote on the November ballot!

 

It seems Crowley, Thomas, Berding plus Bortz of course are in favor of letting the Administration move forward.

^Yea "F" that Monzel.   

 

I wouldn't trust the voters of this region with that, even if gas is $4 a gallon by then.   Either way, nobody is asking for a tax increase here.  What would we be voting on?

Seems Cranley and Qualls are still trying to stall (which Berding says will essentially prevent it from happening) by pushing for Uptown financing to be in place before moving forward. 

 

Sorry I haven't been able to tune in to the entire hearing, but I'm sure others who are in attendance will chime in with more details later.

I wouldn't trust the voters of this region with that, even if gas is $4 a gallon by then.   Either way, nobody is asking for a tax increase here.  What would we be voting on?

 

Even though it is not using tax dollars it could still be put on the ballot.  In Green Township, enough residents signed a petition to get a rezoning put on the ballot for voter approval (see Legacy Place).  If this were to go on a ballot, it would be a City of Cincinnati ballot item only and would not be subject to the suburban vote that took down the light rail initiative.

Cranley, Qualls and Monzel.  Cincinnati's Axis of evil  :whip:

 

Putting this to a vote would be a major mistake at this point.  It would have been a great idea LAST YEAR when we already had the study completed and knew that we'd be discussing this in early 2008.  Voting on it now is essentially just shelving the issue for another 8 months and hoping it will go away.  If they can set up some sort of special voting session in April, fine.  Otherwise, move forward already.

Seems like the motion to put it on the ballot (at least I think this is what they were voting for -- don't know if Qualls or Cranley made other motions that I missed) failed.  The usual suspects voted in favor (Cranley, Qualls, Monzel) but the others voted no  :clap:

 

I'm hoping those more informed about process will be able to enlighten us and let us know what's next.  In the meantime, I'm [cautiously] thinking this is a happy day for Streetcar supporters.

Question for anyone who might know this, but how much have we spent on studies for this initiative so far?

Seems like the motion to put it on the ballot (at least I think this is what they were voting for -- don't know if Qualls or Cranley made other motions that I missed) failed.  T

It didn't fail, it was referred to the administration for a report, which only requires the action of the chair. Additionallly, it was put on the calendar to be referred to a committee for further action.  It is now up to the mayor to determine what committee has jurisdiction over the motion.

Question for anyone who might know this, but how much have we spent on studies for this initiative so far?

The city has spent $130K, the CBC has spent $40K.  This does not include staff salaries.

^cool, thanks!

Here's what happened today in Cincinnati's City Council Finance Committee meeting.

 

Councilmember Chris Bortz's motion to use $800,000 in City funds to study the Uptown-Downtown connection to qualify for Federal funds passed the Finance Committee on a 5-2 vote today.

 

Vice Mayor Crowley and Councilmembers Berding, Ghiz and Thomas all voted for Bortz's motion.

 

Councilmembers John Cranley and Roxanne Qualls -- both of whom say they support a streetcar connection between Uptown and Downtown -- voted against the motion.

 

Cranley is a longtime rail opponent. Qualls' vote was deemed inexplicable by streetcar supporters who attended the meeting.

 

 

where does that put it?  Can anyone explain the impact of today's meeting?

where does that put it?  Can anyone explain the impact of today's meeting?

 

Im nervous now that this "study" will take another year...all while the prices of EVERYTHING continues to go up

where does that put it?  Can anyone explain the impact of today's meeting?

 

 

The Finance Committee recommendation will go to the full Council on Wednesday at 2:00p. A successful vote there will make more planning funds available.

 

The planning for the Downtown leg, where Fed funds aren't going to be used, will continue. Most of this money will go for the Alternatives Analysis for Uptown, which is required if we want to use Fed funds for that part of the project.

 

I don't think the project is necessarily delayed by this.

^^^ but there was no real action today on the OTR-Riverfront line, correct? 

is there an official name for the street car?

is there an official name for the street car?

 

Cincinnati Uptown OTR Trolley??

is there an official name for the street car?

 

Right now it is typically referred to as the Cincinnati Streetcar system.

John sums it up pretty well.  Funding was approved for the study that would be required before we could get federal dollars for the uptown link.  On the bad side was the motion to put it to a public vote in November.  That got referred to the adminstration (presumably for referral to the committee which deals with ballot issues).  Hopefully they shoot that right in the foot.

 

Here's the information I really really want.  How many multimillion dollar projects has Cranley OK'd without a public vote?  How about Monzel?  This would be very beneficial information to have.  I really really want to shoot this false populism right in the foot.

 

 

We  need to investigate cranleys city lights project.  8-)

The opponents could get this on the ballot without council with enough signatures, I'm pretty sure. Bad-mouthing democracy doesn't win supporters.

Yeah, they would need 4500 or so signatures.  My point is not to bad mouth democracy here, but rather that the reasons stated for supporting a ballot initiative are completely bogus when spoken out of the mouth of John Cranley.  I don't believe for one nanosecond that Cranley or Monzel really want to get public input.  How many members of council would support a ballot initiative requiring ballot intiatives for any spending over 25 million dollars (just to pull a number out of my nether regions)?  My guess is zero.

Here's the information I really really want.  How many multimillion dollar projects has Cranley OK'd without a public vote?  How about Monzel?  This would be very beneficial information to have.  I really really want to shoot this false populism right in the foot.

 

Fountain Square, Convention Center, extra Police funding, Cincinnati Park Board projects, MLK roadwork, maybe City West, money for The Banks, how about his City Lights stuff?  I'm sure there is a bunch more that I can't think of right now...like a slew of development projects and money to keep businesses/jobs in the city (i.e. Saks, Convergys, Cincinnati Bell, etc).

is there an official name for the street car?

 

Cincinnati Uptown Neighborhood Transit??

 

 

I hope this is the last time we see this comment. It's not funny.

I agree!  :angel: that is too hardcore for conservative Cincinnati

oh well, we might not have to come up with a name at all thanks to our friends at city hall.

 

 

Streetcar Backers Try To Bring Support Into Loop

 

POSTED: 5:05 pm EDT March 10, 2008

UPDATED: 6:59 pm EDT March 10, 2008

 

CINCINNATI -- The ride is getting rougher for Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory’s top priority.

 

Planners cannot agree whether to begin building a streetcar line that would link the city’s riverfront to historic Findlay Market or wait until they can guarantee a link to the Uptown district.

 

“I'd like to see us get a shovel in the ground as soon as possible,” said City Councilman Chris Bortz. “I think that momentum is critical.”

 

However, some proponents want to slow down until an $800,000 study is completed.

 

“An alternative analysis positions us to apply for federal dollars,” Bortz said. “No matter what we do, we're going to have to take that step.”

 

City Councilman Chris Monzel proposed putting the issue before voters in November to help build public support for the plan to link city neighborhoods with streetcars.

 

“If it's a great idea and everybody's for it, that's awesome – let's move forward – but I think it's very important on such a project of such large magnitude that we get the will of the people,” Monzel said.

 

His proposal leaves streetcar proponents in an uncomfortable position, arguing essentially that the plan should go forward without public support.

 

Mallory and City Manager Milton Dohoney hope to find private partners to help pay for the plan, but they said they must first have a deal in place to extend the line through Over-The-Rhine and toward the University of Cincinnati campus.

 

“This should be looked at as a total complex,” said Vice Mayor David Crowley.

 

If the Uptown loop is not part of the proposal from the start of construction, the streetcar plan could fail to attract crucial support.

 

“We could end up spending $800,000 and never really developing a consensus for any piece of the streetcar,” said City Councilman John Cranley.

 

Re: Councilman Cranley and his proposal to put it to a vote:

 

What a lame excuse for what amounts to a lack of political courage. Elected officials were elected by the public in the first place to represent us and make choices that hopefully make sense.  They can always be voted out at the next election if those choices are bad ones.  But to pass off the decision for a supposed "vox populi" is nothing more than an abdication of their elective responsibility.

 

Stop crawfishing around and make a decision!  Build the initial streetcar line and then get plans underway to expand it.

 

Or as Cheech Marin's caddy in the movie "Tin Cup" said to Kevin Costner's pro-golfer character: "Quit f-----g around and do it!"

Has Cranley proposed a public vote before taxpayer dollars can be spent on the Brent Spence Bridge project??? Has Monzel??

A fairly even handed, if not prostreetcar, article from the enquirer, they even saved the more negative title for the sub heading!

 

A step toward streetcar money

But opponents on council raise possibility of referendum

BY MARGARET A. MCGURK | [email protected]

 

Pro-streetcar City Council members won a victory Monday by approving preliminary steps to get federal money for service to Uptown.

 

Opponents at the same time raised the prospect of a referendum that could kill the city's streetcar plan.

Can anyone answer me this, If phase I is built, is there a possibility that phase II never happens.  Is there a scenario that puts that connection in jeopardy?  I would think there would be a multitude of things that could either stop, or severely delay the connection to Uptown.  Does Uptown have any reason to believe. To me it sounds like this was the misunderstanding and Qualls was the one who misunderstood.  So what does she do?  She "endorses a line from Downtown to Uptown, rather than a loop through Over-the-Rhine." And "Her motion drew six signatures, a majority of the nine council members".  Even though "Mallory intends to see that the streetcar make it up there, in the second Phase" so she settles for something that will be a "guarantee".

 

and there it is.

 

"Monday's meeting was preceded by negotiations - which failed shortly before the committee met - on an overall proposal that would give more assurances about building the Uptown half of the proposed system. Opponents want nothing done without more guarantees; supporters want to move ahead in Over-the-Rhine while planning for Uptown"

 

 

Was the referendum only just proposed or is it definite?

 

 

 

 

if there is a referendum I'm sure the first signatures will be in this order...  Cranley, Monzel, Pete Witte, Cheryl crowell.  :roll:  If the streetcar makes it on,  I want City lights on there!

Did anyone see Cheryl there.

I don't know a ton about the law, but they won't get a referendum through a council vote.  Mallory will make there won't be five council votes.    They'll have to get it via signatures.

 

My question is, worst case scenario, opponents get the signatures, and the referendum fails.  Can't council just pass it again anyway?  They already have the authority to do so right now, and only three members (Cranley, Qualls and Monzel) seem to be against the street car.  So it will pass the council. 

Cheryl was not there from what I saw (unless she was upstairs)

 

The referendum issue was referred to the administration, who will most likely in turn refer it to the council committee that decides on ballot issues.  I am not sure which committee that is or which council members are on that committee.  So no, its not a done deal yet.  Hopefully that council committee votes it down.  If not, perhaps its time to gather signatures for a ballot initiative to require that council put all spending decisions in excess of a fixed percentage of the budget to a ballot initiative :rolleyes:

 

^-- being thoroughly facetious, I know just how well such initiatives work in practice -- see MA proposition 2 1/2

It looks like streetcar proponents on Council will need to be better at tactics than their opponents, when instead it should be coming down to merits of the project. 

Worst case is that either council committee approves the referendum (I see that as fairly unlikely), or enough signatures are gathered to put it on the ballot.  In that case, the politicking really starts.  I'll gladly go knock on doors if that is what it takes.

 

Edit - I think the committee the motion will eventually end up in is the "Rules and Government Operations Committee"  At Monday's meeting Berding did say that he was opposed to sending the motion to the administration since his committee is the committee that hears such matters (he felt it should be sent directly to his committee).  The only committee that Berding chairs is the "Rules and Government Operations Committee".  The other members of that committee are Chris Bortz, and Laketa Cole.  I think that should answer how that committee will likely vote on the issue.

Among the questions is whether a referendum could be binding, because the subject is not a tax issue.

 

anyone know the answer to this?

Even if can't be binding (a nonbinding advisory referendum), it puts supporters in a tough place because it would be hard for council to not wait for the "will of the people."  To my view, the referendum is the "Hail Mary" of the stall and delay crowd.  Frankly, to my eyes, there is enough support on council to push the streetcar through, but this flies in the face of the mayor's desire to have unanimous council decisions... Anyhow, interesting times ahead.

 

In short, "the good fight" continues, and progress is being made slowly but surely.

I know he is probably busy  :wink: but can someone write Obama since he won in cincinnati.  Maybe he would send a letter to council supporting the streetcar.  Having his backing would help if it becomes a ballot issue.

 

 

As president, Barack Obama will re-evaluate the transportation funding process to ensure that smart growth considerations are taken into account. Obama will build upon his efforts in the Senate to ensure that more Metropolitan Planning Organizations create policies to incentivize greater bicycle and pedestrian usage of roads and sidewalks, and he will also re-commit federal resources to public mass transportation projects across the country. Building more livable and sustainable communities will not only reduce the amount of time individuals spent commuting, but will also have significant benefits to air quality, public health and reducing greenhouse gas emissions." 

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/

^Exactly, that's what I was getting at.  When a council member doesn't approve of some parts of the budget, they can't really get the public to veto the budget.  That doesn't sound legal.  This seems to be suspiciously similar to Pat DeWine and Company's "solutions" to funding for a new jail without a tax, all of which were in reality, illegal.

As president, Barack Obama will re-evaluate the transportation funding process to ensure that smart growth considerations are taken into account. Obama will build upon his efforts in the Senate to ensure that more Metropolitan Planning Organizations create policies to incentivize greater bicycle and pedestrian usage of roads and sidewalks, and he will also re-commit federal resources to public mass transportation projects across the country. Building more livable and sustainable communities will not only reduce the amount of time individuals spent commuting, but will also have significant benefits to air quality, public health and reducing greenhouse gas emissions." 

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/

 

 

I hope that's true, but I don't believe anything that politicians say during the election process (especially for the highest office).  Even if they honestly intend to do what they say, they usually underestimate the power of the lobbyists and the opposition party to maintain the status quo. 

hope that's true, but I don't believe anything that politicians say during the election process (especially for the highest office).  Even if they honestly intend to do what they say, they usually underestimate the power of the lobbyists and the opposition party to maintain the status quo

 

Even if he is a lying politician a note to council and opponets would be nice in the near future. People on the fence might think, hey he said he was for it it must be good for cincinnati after all.

^^UNFORTUNATLY, YOUR BOTH RIGHT!

Karma?? Who knows....

 

Some pumps hit 3.45 Gallon today on the westside.  I hope Cranley is low on  gas and has to fill up.  :-P

 

 

Also rememeber Joseph Pichler, the retired Kroger CEO, who is against the streetcar calling it a waste of $?

 

CINCINNATI (AP) - The grocery chain Kroger Company says its fourth-quarter profits slipped 16 percent, partly because of one fewer week in the period than the previous year.

 

They don't want the public to know it is because I and other stopped shopping Kroger in boycott of the ex-CEOs remarks.  :-D

 

 

The result of yesterday's Finance Committee meeting is a major step forward in making a streetcar in Cincinnati a reality.  It has been anticipated from the first presentation to Council on streetcars that the Uptown circulator and connector to Downtown/OTR, critical components of a successful streetcar development strategy, would be funded in part with federal grant dollars.  In order to qualify for those grants, the city is required to follow federal procedures which include conducting Alternatives Analysis and Environmental Clearance studies.  It will take some time to complete the studies.  The sooner they are done, the sooner we can apply for federal support, and the sooner we can build the Uptown circulator and Uptown to Downtown/OTR connector. 

 

It is imperative that we keep the ball moving.  We are still at least a year away from breaking ground.  There will be ample opportunity to ask question and get answers.  Our mission should be to work towards building what we can as soon as we can and expand the system as resources permit. 

 

In my opinion, the referendum issue is a non-starter. 

Thanks Councilman,

That was my general impression of the referendum issue, it seemed thoroughly out of place.  The movement on getting the funding for studying the Uptown link is certainly good evidence that things are moving forward and hopefully is sufficient to prove to the detractors insisting on uptown immediately that progress is being made.  What I fear is that the vote on that motion illustrates that the real concern (of at least a few detractors on council) is not really that the uptown was guaranteed.  If that was truly Councilwoman Qualls intention, I would have thought she would have been onboard for that funding motion.  Anyhow, it will prove to be interesting and you can count on plenty of support as needed.

 

Thanks for all of your hard work on this.  It takes vision to get things started, and some serious intestinal fortitude to keep pressing in the face of the naysayers -- both of which you have more than demonstrated on this issue.

As for the naming issue...I know it sounds corny but I think "Findlay Market Streetcar" helps advertise the city-owned market.  Cranley brought up the legitimate question of how much more city money and effort after the streetcar is built will be needed to achieve the goals of the project.  Obviously the city has spent a lot of money on Findlay Market over the years and the streetcar as planned will run past it.  But I think by naming it, at least in the first phase, after the market does a lot to advertise the market to the rest of the region and it helps explain its purpose to suburbanites.  It's a lot easier to sell it in a touristy way to people who have never been to the market, don't know where it is, etc.  The argument for living downtown or in Over-the-Rhine is simply too much for them to handle and should be avoided because it just muddies things up.   

 

Even with the uptown extension, if it's still called the "Findlay Market Streetcar", it advertises the market to UC students and reminds uptown residents that they can use the streetcar for that purpose.  For the visitor wanting to visit the zoo, a guide book telling them to use the "Findlay Market Streetcar" to travel to the zoo pairs a trip to the market with a trip to the zoo.   

 

Right now with the exception of the opening day parade, the market isn't advertised effectively.  This would help move the market to the center of the city's consciousness.  It also help generate enough traffic for the market to be open 5 or 6 days per week.   

 

 

from the 3.11 'pulse of the city'

 

Streetcar crawls along at Council

By Guest Columnist Brad Thomas

 

The Cincinnati Streetcar continues to move forward through council, albeit slowly. At a Finance Committee hearing on Monday, March 10, the Committee voted 5-2 to approve $800,000 to study the streetcar connection from downtown to uptown with Council Members Bortz, Berding, Crowley, Ghiz and Thomas voting in favor.

 

This expenditure was necessary to make the Cincinnati Streetcar eligible to receive federals funds in the future. Council Members Thomas and Crowley both spoke about the need for a streetcar to improve the City of Cincinnati.

 

There appears to be general agreement among council that the ultimate goal of the streetcar is to connect downtown and uptown, but there is a disagreement on how to accomplish this goal. If the first phase is built connecting downtown, The Banks and Over-the-Rhine, the City will be able to pursue federal funding for the connection to uptown.

 

Without an existing line in place it will be incredibly difficult to obtain federal funding, making it almost impossible to go to uptown with local funds alone. The City Manager has proposed a plan to leverage public dollars to attract private funds to build phase one of the streetcar.

advertisement Phase one can then be used to leverage federal dollars the connection to uptown. Attempting to build the system all at once is a mistake that will either result in the City spending more local dollars or the streetcar not being built at all. Council Members Cranley and Qualls, both of whom have stated they would like to see the streetcar run from downtown to uptown, voted against funding the study necessary to make that connection a reality. Based on her actions at the hearing, it is beginning to appear that Qualls' actual objective is to delay this project.

 

Although not a member of the Finance Committee, Councilman Monzel was present to propose that the streetcar be a ballot initiative rather than be voted on by Council. Monzel's actions seemed to be cloaked in disingenuous populism, using the voters for political cover, rather than doing the job for which he was elected. After first mentioning he supported the streetcar, Councilman Monzel refused to take position on whether he would support the hypothetical ballot initiative.

 

Several members of Council objected to the proposal for a public vote on the streetcar, and only Cranley supported it. Placing the streetcar on the ballot will be a costly delay and set a double standard for transit projects. It is incredibly unusual to vote on individual projects unless there is a sales tax increase the streetcar will not increase taxes. The Fort Washington Way reconstruction, Convention Center

Remodeling and Metro's yearly funding all were approved without a popular vote. Billions are needed to rebuild the Brent Spence Bridge and hundreds of millions more are to be spent on adding a lane to I-75, all without a referendum.

 

City Council needs to not set a double standard for public transportation projects and move forward to make the Cincinnati Streetcar a reality.

 

Brad Thomas is the founder of Cincystreetcar.com

 

As for the naming issue...I know it sounds corny but I think "Findlay Market Streetcar" helps advertise the city-owned market.  Cranley brought up the legitimate question of how much more city money and effort after the streetcar is built will be needed to achieve the goals of the project.  Obviously the city has spent a lot of money on Findlay Market over the years and the streetcar as planned will run past it.  But I think by naming it, at least in the first phase, after the market does a lot to advertise the market to the rest of the region and it helps explain its purpose to suburbanites.  It's a lot easier to sell it in a touristy way to people who have never been to the market, don't know where it is, etc.  The argument for living downtown or in Over-the-Rhine is simply too much for them to handle and should be avoided because it just muddies things up.   

 

Even with the uptown extension, if it's still called the "Findlay Market Streetcar", it advertises the market to UC students and reminds uptown residents that they can use the streetcar for that purpose.  For the visitor wanting to visit the zoo, a guide book telling them to use the "Findlay Market Streetcar" to travel to the zoo pairs a trip to the market with a trip to the zoo.   

 

Right now with the exception of the opening day parade, the market isn't advertised effectively.  This would help move the market to the center of the city's consciousness.  It also help generate enough traffic for the market to be open 5 or 6 days per week.   

 

 

Certainly worth thought... But to me, one of the things that has to be on the table for private partnership dollars (a big part of the funding) is something akin to naming rights, or at least have it available as a possible carrot.  I like "Findlay Market Streetcar" better than the "Pampers Express", but if P&G wants to cough up 30 mil to call it the Pampers Express, have at it ;)

 

Just my two cents anyhow :)