Posted October 6, 200915 yr Museum tax will shrink no matter what By Jessica Brown • [email protected] • October 5, 2009 Their are some charts attached to the link that give a breakdown of how the money is spent. http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091005/NEWS0108/910060317 That's because the $16.2 million levy proposed for the November ballot is smaller than the current one - if it passes, it will cost the owner of a $100,000 home less than $5 a year. Also, a separate museum tax issue will disappear completely from residents' tax bills.
October 6, 200915 yr Author Cincinnati Museum Center Receives Top Honor Today http://www.wcpo.com/news/local/story/Cincinnati-Museum-Center-Receives-Top-Honor-Today/t3xUrm8c10qKSSRi1NqNag.cspx The Museum Center at Union Terminal has been named one of 10 recipients of the 2009 National Medal for Museum and Library Service. It's the nation's highest honor for museums and libraries.
October 12, 200915 yr I see that some of the funding could be used to help improve the Amtrak station facilities for the existing Cardinal service. Perhaps it might also be applicable for the future 3C route to Dayton, Columbus and Cleveland? "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
October 29, 200915 yr An excellent run-down of all of the issues during this election: Your choice, Your vote Be informed, be educated, vote for what you believe in.
July 11, 201410 yr As most of you in Cincinnati know, there is a push to get a sales tax increase of 0.25% to pay for major renovations of Union Terminal (Museum Center building) and Music Hall. Icon Tax: Five things you need to know How is this different from the stadium sales tax? How can taxpayers be sure cost estimates are accurate? Why isn't the city paying a bigger share? Why don't patrons of the buildings pay for it? What will taxpayers get for their money? ^Those questions are answered in the Enquirer article. One question I have about this: is there a sunset clause in the proposal? Once all of the debt for the renovations are paid off, what happens to the 0.25%? Does the county still collect the money? If so, how would the county be required to spend it?
July 11, 201410 yr I remember reading 0.25 percent would be for 9 years. They could have done 0.5 percent for 4 but that would have been perceived as too steep. Whereas I can see not raising ticket prices at the Museum Center, I think they should at Music Hall. The ballet and symphony crowd is definitely more well heeled. The sales tax, although good at capturing money from outside the county, is ultimately a regressive tax. Since much of the Music Hall renovations directly deal with the user experience at performances I see no problem with a ticket tax on the folks that attend those events to help supplement. www.cincinnatiideas.com
July 11, 201410 yr Yeah that was definitely the time frame for paying off the debt, but I wonder of the ballot language will be written to officially end the increase after all debt is paid off. If not, I highly doubt Hamilton County would go out of their way to lower the rate to pre-icon tax rates.
July 21, 201410 yr Here is the real problem and I explained this on my blog a few days ago. Historic preservation is nota one time thing. Both these buildings need continual maintenance. These are 'quick political fixes' because the city is embarrassed about having not on but two landmarks on the national most endangered list. Rather than conduct a long term look and come up with long term fix this really is just a bandaid. We need to look at the current use of these buildings, are there additional uses in addition to the current. For example could a boutiques hotel operate at music hall. Or perhaps what we need to look at is all that land in front of the museum center. Maybe the solution there is to develop it with say a convention center/hotel and residential and connect that to museum center. Put an underground parking garage under the new construction. Our current convention center is joke and you could move museum center into that while you make renovations. Naming rights: P&G music hall anyone? Other cities do this. The point is that the things that operate out of here are not profitable and we need to figure out how to change that. Historic preservation is a continuous process. By the time you fix one thing something else need attention. The tax will never go away, it will be 'Oh now we need to fix this or that." The venues must be made 'viable' and now they are not. Old buildings are never 'restored' they are just at a temporary state of not needing something. As anyone who owns an old house.
July 21, 201410 yr This isn't a quick fix or bandaid at all. This a massive, complete and total renovation of both of these buildings. Even when you maintain buildings properly, they're going to need this type of major work every few decades. I would gladly pay additional tax to renovate this buildings than do something cheesy like sell the naming rights for Music Hall.
July 21, 201410 yr Here is the real problem and I explained this on my blog a few days ago. Historic preservation is nota one time thing. Both these buildings need continual maintenance. These are 'quick political fixes' because the city is embarrassed about having not on but two landmarks on the national most endangered list. This plan has been in the works for years. It isn't a quick reaction to being placed on the National Register's list of endangered buildings. If you honestly think that, you have no idea what you're talking about. This task force has been studying what to do for over a year.
July 21, 201410 yr Here is the real problem and I explained this on my blog a few days ago. Historic preservation is nota one time thing. Both these buildings need continual maintenance. These are 'quick political fixes' because the city is embarrassed about having not on but two landmarks on the national most endangered list. This plan has been in the works for years. It isn't a quick reaction to being placed on the National Register's list of endangered buildings. If you honestly think that, you have no idea what you're talking about. This task force has been studying what to do for over a year. Yeah, I have been reading about renovation plans for Union Terminal and Music Hall for years. All that was missing was a way to pay for it.
July 22, 201410 yr Survey by Ohio Rising (as opposed to Ohio Riesling) https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/Musichalltax
July 24, 201410 yr Has anyone seen Cincinnati Tea Party's graphs on this? It is ridiculous how they currently show and what they are proposing, I wonder if people really eat this up? http://cincinnatiteaparty.org/different-plan-for-union-terminal-citizens-oversight-board-committee-conclusions/ Showing Hamilton County Pays 81% and Cincinnati pays 5%. Actually, with the sales tax a total cost, since Hamilton County is around 800,000 residents, Cincinnati Comprises 300,000 or about 37.5%. Re-do the math, and that graph should read: Cincinnati with 34.2% coverage total, Gifts at around 15% total coverage, and the rest of Hamilton county at 52%. But in the end, it doesn't really matter because it is a sales tax so actual citizens of Hamilton County won't be paying that whole amount, right? What is the capture rate of sales tax in Hamilton County, does anyone know? If say 30% capture rate from citizens outside of Hamilton County, the graph would be: 10 % gifts, 24% Cincinnati citizens, 36% rest of Hamilton County citizens, and 30% from citizens outside of Cincinnati.
July 24, 201410 yr About 50% of the sales tax is generated from out-of-county people. (See the last paragraph on the "How is this different from stadium sales tax?" slide at the top) So Cincinnati would have 30% of 50% of the sales tax (which is 81% of the total money) plus the 4% we are already contributing. Here is my chart with updated numbers (assuming the 4% is accurate from the $10 million Cincinnati is contributing and the 15% gifts is accurate).
July 24, 201410 yr A Newsmakers episode about this stuff http://www.local12.com//entertainment/features/newsmakers/stories/newsmakers-july-13-2014-79.shtml
July 29, 201410 yr Cranley steps up on Union Terminal funding Cincinnati Mayor John Cranley said Monday he would have the city make annual payments toward the upkeep of Union Terminal for the next 25 years, a move that could pave the way for Hamilton County commissioners to place the so-called icon tax on November’s ballot. Cranley, a Democrat, will propose that the city continue to make $200,000-a-year annual payments toward Union Terminal’s maintenance. That’s what the city has been paying each year, but it is not legally obligated to continue doing so. The mayor has been discussing the idea with Hamilton County Commissioner Greg Hartmann. Hartmann, a Republican, wants a greater financial commitment from the city to the $331 million overhaul of Union Terminal and Music Hall before voting to put a 0.25 percentage point sales tax increase before voters. I commend Cranley for doing this. I don't know where the money is going to come from. That will likely have to be decided by council. If this gets Hartmann to agree to place it on the ballot, I support it, though. I also disagree that the city should be more responsible for the upkeep than the county. It's simply a way for Hamilton County to spend less and get the same result, which is a shame.
July 29, 201410 yr They city has already been spending $200K annually for UT maintenance without being required to do so. This would simply enshrine in the city budget/operations for the proceeding 25 yrs.
August 1, 201410 yr Biz Courier has pie charts about who would pay the sales taxes. Not sure how they know if people buying stuff do or don't live in the county, city http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2014/08/chart-of-the-day-who-will-pay-music-hall-union.html
August 5, 201410 yr Apparently at the urging of Tea Party types, County Commissioners Hartmann and Monzel propose dropping Music Hall from the deal: http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/elections/2014/08/04/follow-key-icontax-meeting-live/13568649/
August 5, 201410 yr COAST's strategy is very clear here. They know that if a Union Terminal & Music Hall issue goes to the voters, it will pass. They also know that they probably can't keep the issue completely off the ballot, with the large amount of momentum that the Save Our Icons group is gathering. So the best that they can do is try to reduce the size of the ballot issue, restricting it to just Union Terminal. It doesn't make any sense that one would be dropped from the plan but not the other -- both buildings are still owned by the city. I guess their argument is that Union Terminal is used by "normal people" while Music Hall is only used by the "upper class". I don't even know where to start with that one... Finally, I'm really annoyed by the argument that Music Hall's renovation should only be a bare minimum structural renovation and should not include anything cosmetic. This will probably be the only major renovation that both buildings get for the next 50 years. I don't just want to make sure that they're still standing, I want to make sure that they look as good as they can look and represent our city well. I am looking forward to the unbricking of the bricked-up windows on Music Hall. But instead, some of the commissioners only want to do a half-@$$ed renovation.
August 5, 201410 yr Private donations will disappear if Music Hall removed from icon tax plan, supporters say As Hamilton County commissioners move toward eliminating Music Hall from a plan to repair and renovate it and Union Terminal, supporters of the icon tax say doing so will lead to $40 million in pledged private funding disappearing. http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2014/08/05/private-donations-will-disappear-if-music-hall.html
August 6, 201410 yr Classic Divide and Conquer strategy by COAST. Take Music Hall out of the proposal and whittle down the UT proposal while working to defeat it in the fall. What I hope the county commissioners understand is, COAST is not coming from a place where they share the common goal of rehabbing these buildings. Any praise for these buildings or stated desire to fix them is crocodile tears. They are not trying to figure out the best way to do it because they would be perfectly content if nothing was done at all. And saying they simply don't care may be giving to much credit- they would feel a great amount of schadenfreude towards the city if these buildings crumbled and then love to use it as a talking point on AM talk radio it as another example of city incompetence. Why, why, why are the Hamilton County commissioners listening to exurban tea party interests from Butler and Clermont counties. Why are they not listening to proven leaders who have actually achieved something in their lives like Otto Budig and Bob McDonald. www.cincinnatiideas.com
August 6, 201410 yr And it's not as if Chris Monzel has achieved anything, ever. He votes against everything.
August 6, 201410 yr I think it is pretty simple. All of it is a smokescreen. The Hartmann and Monzel don't want the city to succeed. They don't want money being put back into the city, that would hurt their constituents in the outlying suburbs. They know it is a great plan and that it would pass if it went through. What are they going to sell now, if the $40 million in private donations is gone, if Cinci is taking away their $20 million, and if half the tax credits are gone? Will the county vote for almost the full price tag of Union Terminal? How do they even know what that cost would be? It is fairly simple, they don't care about Union Terminal or Music Hall and they don't want that money put into the city. The next step is to figure out how to get them out of office as soon as possible.
August 6, 201410 yr If the County Commissioners won't pass the plan as-is, we need to put it on the shelf and focus all of this energy on getting Monzel voted out of office. Then figure out a way to get it back on the ballot next year.
August 6, 201410 yr If the County Commissioners won't pass the plan as-is, we need to put it on the shelf and focus all of this energy on getting Monzel voted out of office. Then figure out a way to get it back on the ballot next year. I agree. In my opinion, COAST and County Commissioner Monzel don't want Over the Rhine and the core of Cincinnati to succeed because it takes away from their interests and constituents. It is all political. You know when all the opponents arguments to the streetcar, these arguments, etc. Wonder why they don't make sense? It is because they don't. They don't want the city core to bounce back and revitalize, they want the status quo and will do and make up anything for it to happen. Fortunately, I think the tides are changing.
August 6, 201410 yr It's definitely about driving a wedge between Cincinnati and the rest of Hamilton County.
August 6, 201410 yr This is the letter I sent to County Commissioners the other day. Commissioners, It is very disappointing how the board as a whole is framing this issue. Cincinnati is doing its best to provide funding for continued maintenance of the structures. The city is the one who is taking the long-term risk on the structures. To ask Cincinnati to pay even more than they have already committed is very telling of your character and values. The discussion has made it sound like city residents are paying nothing and the surrounding communities in Hamilton County are paying all of the cost. In fact, approximately 42% of the money is coming from outside of Hamilton County, 15% from gifts, 4% from direct Cincinnati funds, and the remaining 39% is being split between everyone in Hamilton County (which, I think you forgot, includes the City of Cincinnati). I understand that the city and county have been at odds with each other over the years about various issues such as the Metropolitan Sewer District and the responsible bidder ordinance, but it seems that you are picking a fight simply to extort the city because of the previous bad blood. If we are ever going to reach a semblance of regional cooperation in Hamilton County, we are going to have to start negotiating in the open. It was the understanding of City Council that this ongoing maintenance commitment of $200,000 of direct city money every year for each building was going to satisfy your desire for additional city funding. Now that doesn't seem to be enough. If council increases the commitment, would you simply raise the stakes again? If you don't recall, Hamilton County was supposed to pick up the operating expenses for SORTA decades ago and simply ignored it since the city was already paying for it. If the City of Cincinnati wanted to further fracture the county like you three seem committed to doing, they could propose a refusal to pick up residents outside of city limits on the city funded Metro buses. Skipping the rest of Hamilton County and going straight to park and rides in the other counties, who, if you were unaware, contribute several hundred thousand dollars each to operate park and rides. Before Cincinnati offers rides to county residents again, perhaps we should require the county pays us back for the decades of operating the REGIONAL transportation system. It is disgraceful the way you are treating Cincinnati. Sometimes it feels like you are actively working to undermine the city and I hope that voters around the county wake up to your actions and demand a more reasonable representation. If you truly want to see the county prosper, let's stop this infighting and work openly with each other. Sincerely, Ryan Lammi
August 6, 201410 yr If the County Commissioners won't pass the plan as-is, we need to put it on the shelf and focus all of this energy on getting Monzel voted out of office. Then figure out a way to get it back on the ballot next year. I agree. In my opinion, COAST and County Commissioner Monzel don't want Over the Rhine and the core of Cincinnati to succeed because it takes away from their interests and constituents. It is all political. You know when all the opponents arguments to the streetcar, these arguments, etc. Wonder why they don't make sense? It is because they don't. They don't want the city core to bounce back and revitalize, they want the status quo and will do and make up anything for it to happen. Fortunately, I think the tides are changing. Exactly, COAST may claim to be an "anti-tax" group as a cover, but they are truly anti-city at their core. They do not want the city to succeed. You may think I'm being overly dramatic by making that statement, but all you need to do is look at what they've supported and opposed over the years. There is no consistency except that that oppose things that will help the city grow and improve, and support things that will prevent it from doing so. For an example of their inconsistencies, think about the fact that they ran a campaign called "We Demand A Vote" when it came to the streetcar, but when it comes to the Icon Tax, they don't think we should be allowed to vote until there's a plan they agree with.
August 6, 201410 yr Does anyone know if Monzel's running for re-election unopposed, like Hartmann and Portune did the last time they were "elected"? What a racket county commissioner jobs are becoming. It seems as though an incumbent commissioner has the job as long as he wants, because opposing parties won't field candidates. Sick. Travis, is it really true that petition drives aren't allowed on the county level? ETA: I checked the Bd. of Elections site and Monzel does have an opponent this November - Sean Patrick Feeney.
August 6, 201410 yr Travis, is it really true that petition drives aren't allowed on the county level? Not Travis, but it is true. Only County Commissioners and regional transit organizations can put measures on the ballot.
August 6, 201410 yr Does anyone know if Monzel's running for re-election unopposed, like Hartmann and Portune did the last time they were "elected"? What a racket county commissioner jobs are becoming. It seems as though an incumbent commissioner has the job as long as he wants, because opposing parties won't field candidates. Sick. Travis, is it really true that petition drives aren't allowed on the county level? ETA: I checked the Bd. of Elections site and Monzel does have an opponent this November - Sean Patrick Feeney. Our city charter states that we can force an issue onto the ballot by gathering a certain number of signatures, indexed to how many people voted in the last mayoral election. There is no such provision at the county level.
August 6, 201410 yr Does anyone know if Monzel's running for re-election unopposed, like Hartmann and Portune did the last time they were "elected"? What a racket county commissioner jobs are becoming. It seems as though an incumbent commissioner has the job as long as he wants, because opposing parties won't field candidates. Sick. Travis, is it really true that petition drives aren't allowed on the county level? ETA: I checked the Bd. of Elections site and Monzel does have an opponent this November - Sean Patrick Feeney. Another reason why a city-county merger would be a better form of government. City mayor and council elections seem to work as intended, but county governments and townships are poorly understood by most people and you see so many of them run as fiefdoms.
August 6, 201410 yr Classic Divide and Conquer strategy by COAST. Take Music Hall out of the proposal and whittle down the UT proposal while working to defeat it in the fall. What I hope the county commissioners understand is, COAST is not coming from a place where they share the common goal of rehabbing these buildings. Any praise for these buildings or stated desire to fix them is crocodile tears. They are not trying to figure out the best way to do it because they would be perfectly content if nothing was done at all. And saying they simply don't care may be giving to much credit- they would feel a great amount of schadenfreude towards the city if these buildings crumbled and then love to use it as a talking point on AM talk radio it as another example of city incompetence. Why, why, why are the Hamilton County commissioners listening to exurban tea party interests from Butler and Clermont counties. Why are they not listening to proven leaders who have actually achieved something in their lives like Otto Budig and Bob McDonald. Chris Monzel is a COASTer.
August 6, 201410 yr Does anyone know if Monzel's running for re-election unopposed, like Hartmann and Portune did the last time they were "elected"? What a racket county commissioner jobs are becoming. It seems as though an incumbent commissioner has the job as long as he wants, because opposing parties won't field candidates. Sick. Travis, is it really true that petition drives aren't allowed on the county level? ETA: I checked the Bd. of Elections site and Monzel does have an opponent this November - Sean Patrick Feeney. Another reason why a city-county merger would be a better form of government. City mayor and council elections seem to work as intended, but county governments and townships are poorly understood by most people and you see so many of them run as fiefdoms. I disagree. If a city-county merger were to happen, we'd probably throw out the existing city charter. I'm much more in favor of keeping county government separate and merging some of the municipalities within the county with each other. But now I'm getting off-topic.
August 6, 201410 yr Monzel's motion to drop Music Hall, and arbitrarily lower the cost of renovating Union Terminal passes. 0.25% increase for maximum of 5 years is what will be on the ballot. Now we get to vote on whether we want to half-ass the renovation of Union Terminal or if we want to kick the can down the road.
August 6, 201410 yr Will "Save Our Icons" become "Save Our Icon" or will they shelf the plan until we can do it right?
August 6, 201410 yr I'm skeptical that the .25% for 5 years is enough money to do everything they wanted to do at Union Terminal.
August 6, 201410 yr I'm skeptical that the .25% for 5 years is enough money to do everything they wanted to do at Union Terminal. This entire situation is a joke. Even the people who put together this "plan" don't know what they'll be able to do with it. They just figured, "Hey, let's use 3rd grade arithmetic, divide by 2, and call it a day. Now someone give me my juice box."
August 6, 201410 yr I am conflicted about the whole "Save Our Icon(s)" plan. It was a pretty bold advertising move - it's helped raise awareness of the Museum Center and Union Terminal - and it's issues, considering that they (the Museum Center) have held numerous events that go "behind the scenes" of the complex and have invited the media over and over to see its rapidly deteriorating condition. We know it's in poor condition. But Music Hall? I felt that it's always been a harder sell. It's not a failing building, but it is outdated. It doesn't have serious structural issues on the realm of Union Terminal, but it does have a maintenance backlog. And cosmetic issues notwithstanding, does it really need to be lumped in this tax? Perhaps not. But now we have no choice in deciding that.
August 6, 201410 yr I am conflicted about the whole "Save Our Icon(s)" plan. It was a pretty bold advertising move - it's helped raise awareness of the Museum Center and Union Terminal - and it's issues, considering that they (the Museum Center) have held numerous events that go "behind the scenes" of the complex and have invited the media over and over to see its rapidly deteriorating condition. We know it's in poor condition. But Music Hall? I felt that it's always been a harder sell. It's not a failing building, but it is outdated. It doesn't have serious structural issues on the realm of Union Terminal, but it does have a maintenance backlog. And cosmetic issues notwithstanding, does it really need to be lumped in this tax? Perhaps not. But now we have no choice in deciding that. I would go in the opposite direction. We should have a county-wide (or multi-county) Arts & Culture tax that supports all of these organizations. Elected leaders should not be arbitrarily deciding which institutions are worthy of our dollars. If we did it right, we could even have a portion of the tax dedicated to capital expenditures and the rest going to operating expenses, replacing the existing property tax levies that go to the Zoo and Union Terminal.
August 6, 201410 yr Greg Hartmann on with Bill Cunningham at 2:06 PM today... "It's just fate, as usual, keeping its bargain and screwing us in the fine print..." - John Crichton
August 6, 201410 yr At the end of the day, Union Terminal will be renovated and then people will move on to fixing music hall. it will not fall apart and will be saved, it is just going to be kicked down the road. And since nobody has mentioned this so far, this is all Cranley's fault
August 6, 201410 yr I would go in the opposite direction. We should have a county-wide (or multi-county) Arts & Culture tax that supports all of these organizations. Elected leaders should not be arbitrarily deciding which institutions are worthy of our dollars. If we did it right, we could even have a portion of the tax dedicated to capital expenditures and the rest going to operating expenses, replacing the existing property tax levies that go to the Zoo and Union Terminal. So you want to replace the property tax levies with a regressive sales tax? And since nobody has mentioned this so far, this is all Cranley's fault Huh? ???
August 6, 201410 yr I am conflicted about the whole "Save Our Icon(s)" plan. It was a pretty bold advertising move - it's helped raise awareness of the Museum Center and Union Terminal - and it's issues, considering that they (the Museum Center) have held numerous events that go "behind the scenes" of the complex and have invited the media over and over to see its rapidly deteriorating condition. We know it's in poor condition. But Music Hall? I felt that it's always been a harder sell. It's not a failing building, but it is outdated. It doesn't have serious structural issues on the realm of Union Terminal, but it does have a maintenance backlog. And cosmetic issues notwithstanding, does it really need to be lumped in this tax? Perhaps not. But now we have no choice in deciding that. Yup, and now the public thinks MH is falling apart. But Monzel is still wrong.
