"The City, and its various Boards and Commissions, may not spend any monies for right-of-way acquisition or construction of improvements for passenger rail transportation (e.g., a trolley or streetcar) within the city limits without first submitting the question of approval of such expenditure to a vote of the electorate of the City and receiving a majority affirmative vote for the same."She wanted to know if this applied to federal and state as well as city funds. She wanted to know if it applied to capital, operating, restricted and unrestricted funds. After a lengthy exchange with COAST General Counsel Chris Finney reminiscent of Dr. Seuss' "Green Eggs & Ham," she appears to be clear on it now. "Any" means any. The charter amendment subjects certain expenditures to a public vote. It does not restrict funding sources.
Other testimony surrounded the use of the abbreviation "e.g." which comes from the Latin expression exempli gratia. Progressers worried that voters might be too stupid to comprehend 6th grade english, and asked that the phase containing the abbreviation be stricken. As a public service, COAST would like to present this brief lesson from the feature film, "Get Shorty" (NSFW):
Committee members realized that Progressers were talking about the very same citizens who elected them, and figured voters couldn't possibly be as stupid as Cincinnatians for Progress were portraying them. So the committee approved the ballot language as originally written, and as over 11,500 petitioners signed it.
The City Charter requires the full Council to approve the language tomorrow. This is a ministerial function; meaning that since all requirements were met, and no legal challenge was made, it must be done. Councilmembers have no other lawful option. The amendment will then be returned to the Hamilton County Board of Elections for inclusion on the November 3rd ballot.
Let's see what happens when Chris Smitherman does his next radio show in Latin.
ReplyDeletecant wait for cincinnatians to put highway infrastructure up for ballot measures too! go coast! ouch, watch out for that pot hole.
ReplyDeleteSemper ubi sub-ubi,
ReplyDeleteSic semper tyrannis-saurus rex,
Ar, ar, ar!
C'mon now Mark - no reason to feel suicidal. The rails won't hurt you're precious tires one bit.
ReplyDeleteMatt -
ReplyDeleteMark Miller isn't asking you to pay for his "precious tires". His "precious tires" don't cause a $2million per year operating loss cause the City of Cincinnati to have to dip into its general fund, causing more police and fire layoffs. Your precious streetcar does those things.
More cars = the city has to build, maintain, and staff more parking garages and lots. More cars = the city has to tear down more of its existing buildings -- buildings where people work and pay earnings tax -- in order to clear space for those garages and lots.
ReplyDeleteLess cars means buildings where there are parking lots now, buildings where people can live or work and contribute to the tax base.
So COAST doesn't mind that Cincinnati and other cities are in the parking business, and have to pay legions of people to staff, secure, and maintain those facilities (and typically heavily subsidizes its parking facilities), but throws fits when a city makes a move to improve its public transportation.
If we have to vote on every inch of track, we would have to vote on the installation of each and every parking meter. Why not sell our traffic lights and replace them with junk yard stop signs while we're at it?
I usually try not to respond to people afraid to show their real names, but Bris (whoever you are), your response shows just how backwards and hypocritical COAST's arguments are.
ReplyDeleteInfrastructure associated with the automobile is one of the most heavily subsidized portions of our society. The hypothetical shortfall of $2m/year that the streetcar would create is a drop in the bucket in comparison - but if you want to argue hypotheticals, the amount of businesses, jobs, and new construction along the line the streetcar would create for the city I'm sure would outweigh that operating loss your talking about.
In addition, why aren't you arguing against the METRO bus system in Cincinnati, which operates at a loss?
ReplyDeleteMatt,
ReplyDeletePut your money where your mouth is. If the streetcar is certain to create so much value, then capture it to pay for the streetcar. You have the perfect tool already at your disposal. The entire basin is already covered by a TIF district. Surely the mighty streetcar could at least cover its own operating costs, if not the majority of its capital cost. The fact that planners have covered only a pittance of the capital cost from TIF indicates that most of their claims for "increased economic value" are just a load of hooey. And we already have quite enough hooey.
Glad you brought up Metro. It runs at a loss because their board wants it to. They could raise fares and/or optimize their routes any time they want to break even. But that would adversely impact the very people who need it most.
Back in 1970 voters amended the city charter to purchase the bus company from its private owner and make it a public resource. Voters also dedicated a 0.3% earnings tax to fund public transit, which is 1/7th of all earnings taxes collected by the city.
So you see, we already have all the key features in place with the bus system:
1. Voter approval
2. Dedicated reliable revenue stream
3. Generally available to the ENTIRE public, not just a favored segment.
How, in good conscience, can you promote a streetcar that fails these three basic elements of a proper transit system?
Mark, maybe if you actually used public transportation you would see the benefits. Stop trying to turn this into an issue of the "have" and "have nots" with your "separate but equal" comments. You're not fooling anyone. How does COAST claim to represent minorities and the disabled when it's a predominately white suburban based special interest organization?
ReplyDelete"How does COAST claim to represent minorities and the disabled when it's a predominately white suburban based special interest organization?"
ReplyDeleteYou're right! We should all ride on the all-white, well-to-do, urban professional streetcar. We do not like buses. They are full of poor minorities. We need a new taxpayer-funded toy to move us about our newly gentrified naighborhoods. I don't want to pull my Audi out of the garage to go to a downtown restaurant. I need an all-white trolley!
Nevermind that the minority population in OTR doesn't want it. Nevermind that the NAACP is against it. We are well-to-do white urban professionals! We know what is better for minorities than they do. They have no right to have a vote on the future of their neighborhood. It is our God-given right to decide for them.
The NAACP is against it because you guys are paying Chris Smitherman. It's a well-known secret.
ReplyDeleteProvost -
ReplyDeletePut up or shut up. I expect that your accusations are completely baseless.
You expect us to believe that Smitherman really keeps a roof over his head, in these tough times, with his "financial planning" business?
ReplyDeleteProvost -
ReplyDeleteI don't expect you to believe anything. You see what you want to see. The fact, however, that you don't think Christopher Smitherman is capable of having a personal conservative viewpoint on any number of issues without being controlled by Chris Finney is extremely insulting and racist. Black people don't all think alike just because they're black. Get used to it. The Democrat control of the African-American community in this City is eroding. African-Americans can think for themselves. They don't need white well-to-do all urban professionals like you to tell them what to think.
Provost, why don't you just call Smitherman the N-word and tell us how you really feel? Your racist attitude that a black man can't hold a job without getting paid off by whitey is beyond offensive at this point.
ReplyDeleteNice to hear Chris himself chime in.
ReplyDeleteOnce again, COAST is making my own arguments for me...
ReplyDeleteTo answer your questions, Mark:
"How, in good conscience, can you promote a streetcar that fails these three basic elements of a proper transit system?"
How, in good conscience, can you support a transit system that has never and will never pay for itself, which includes one of the most massive rip-offs in taxpayer history, which happened only just months ago?! Is it because you enjoy the interior of your car too much, or because you enjoy sitting in peace alone when going places (even though you've paid for 3-4 additional seats in your car, which in itself sounds like you've taxed yourself needlessly)?
"[METRO bus system] runs at a loss because their board wants it to. They could raise fares and/or optimize their routes any time they want to break even. But that would adversely impact the very people who need it most."
Really, so does this upset you, as someone so dutifully against Additional Taxes and Spending, or does it fill an important need for the community, thus making it a wise investment to you? If you think it's a wise investment, great - now think about a public transit system that actually creates jobs & development, draws people back into the city limits (which creates more revenue for the city), and actually INSPIRES people for a change. If you're not against METRO being in the red, why the hell would you be against the Streetcar from hypothetically being in the red? The point you're conveniently ignoring is that the streetcar route could replace the bus route (along those lines), thus limiting the METRO's (or Streetcar's) projected yearly shortfall, but again, the streecar would instead create growth along the lines - something buses won't ever accomplish; that's proven.
"So you see, we already have all the key features in place with the bus system:
1. Voter approval
2. Dedicated reliable revenue stream
3. Generally available to the ENTIRE public, not just a favored segment."
1. When the city purchased the rights to the bus system, they had to increase taxes, which is why it required a vote. THE STREETCAR DOESN'T RAISE TAXES FOR ITS CONSTRUCTION, which means that it's not necessary for a public vote. There's an obvious difference there.
2. The bus system has a dedicated, reliable revenue stream? I think we've already been over that. It doesn't - which is why it was recently given a multi-million dollar subsidy. In comparison, even if the streetcar does operate in the red in 2013 (its first year, or any following year), who's to say all of this job & infrastructure creation won't happen, eventually balancing it out?
3. So, it makes you happy that there's a subsidized transit system that covers the entire city? Great! THE STREETCAR LINE THAT WILL BE BUILT IS JUST THE FIRST SEGMENT OF A MUCH LARGER RAIL INITIATIVE. I wonder if you would've had the same argument when buses started running very small routes in their startup years. Probably not. Anyway, it's irrelevant, because the Streetcar will hit the two largest employment centers in the city, plus OTR, plus a ton of entertainment hotspots - not too shabby for a first route. If you're worried that the streetcar doesn't run in every district in the city (like Hyde Park, which I know you're really sad about), what keeps these people that your talking about from transfering on/off the rail line to get wherever they're going? Your argument makes no sense.
So, to wrap up, in essence you're basically fighting an upgraded transit system which has proven to be a stimulator of growth (residential, commercial, and industrial), while helping to minimize automobile traffic, and serving the public's transit needs. You guys are smart.
You're right Matt -
ReplyDeleteOne mass transportation system in this City needing a multi-million dollar yearly subsidy to cover its operations losses is not enough. We need to add another yearly multi-million dollar loser to the bottom line. In fact, why stop there? Why not subsidize rickshaws and horse drawn carraiges to the tune of several million dollars a year. After all, the City's general fund is in GREAT shape. I'm sure it can absorb many, many more money losing programs with no negative effects on basic City services.
PS - This argument is moot anyways. Nobody in the know says the streetcar addresses transportation needs. It runs along routes already served by underutilized metro buses. It's proponents at City Hall claim it's an economic development tool, not a transportation tool
It's both, "Bris" - an economic development tool and a form of transportation. Everyone knows where the car is headed - and it'll probably be in our lifetime, if it doesn't kill a satisfactory standard of living first.
ReplyDeleteAgain, the bus and rail routes wouldn't overlap, thus decreasing transit expenditure. And again, you're assuming the ridership will be the same as the current bus system along that same route, with no economic development along the route, with negative yearly operating budgets. You just want to apply every negative aspect you can find without reasoning. It doesn't work that way.
Lastly, I still don't hear you complaining about the current massive tax & spending issues relating to everything about the automobile, which in my mind makes your rail arguments completely moot.
Provost the Racist - I'm the one who wrote the 9/12 2:02 PM post, and actually I'm a white guy. But I'm not surprised to see you making more race-based assumptions.
ReplyDeleteNot all of us white guys are racist just because you are.
"Lastly, I still don't hear you complaining about the current massive tax & spending issues relating to everything about the automobile, which in my mind makes your rail arguments completely moot."
ReplyDeleteMatt - I don't see you doing anything about the tax and spend issues with the automobile either, which in my mind makes YOUR rail argument totally moot.
That's the response that I would expect from an arrogant, anonymous posting prick - you have no idea what I don on a day to day basis.
ReplyDeleteI am doing something about it, Bris, just not forming PACs that spread blatant lies to citizens to push my own, selfish agenda.
Put up or shut up.
Matt -
ReplyDeleteWay to follow the standard arrogant streetcar progresser line - when all else fails resort to insults and calling names. That's exactly what I would have expected from you.
For the record, you have no idea what I do on a day to day basis either. You put up or shut up.
Tell us Matt, what tangible steps have you taken to overturn all that road spending that you claim to be fighting.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWay to follow the standard arrogant ENORMOUS HIGHWAY & GAS TAX progresser line, Bris - when all else fails resort to insults and calling names. That's exactly what I would have expected from you.
ReplyDeleteStill, I'm sorry about that - I sunk to your level, and I shouldn't have. I don't know if you're really a prick or not, because I have no idea who you are.
I'll answer further comments once you give indication that you have a spine... and a real name.
Thanks.
Matt - I'll give a crap about your demands for a "real name" when you similarly demand the "real names" of
ReplyDelete- The Provost of Cincinnati
- Cincinnati4Progress
- Gordon Bombay
- Quim
- UC Student
- CAAST
- Jenny K.
- Brad
- and the dozens of anonymous pro-streetcar posters on this blog.
If you don't want to defend your positions then go away. This blog will be no worse off with your absence.
On and on and on and on...
ReplyDeleteDo your homework "Bris" - with the exception of "UC Student", none of the people on the list are going out of their way to hide their real identity. You can find them by clicking their name link, or just researching a little online.
Oh, whoops - research... doing that might reveal something truthful and positive. You may want to avoid that.
Matt -
ReplyDeleteI'm hurt that you don't appreciate my research skills. If you were here now you'd see tears streaming down my cheeks. I live only to please arrogant trolley advocates.
This blog, like many, many blogs, allows people to post anonymously or with registered screen names. It's not a movement that is isolated to anti-streetcar folks. It's a common occourance on the internet. If you don't like it, I suggest you seek another forum. Again, you won't be missed.
"I'm hurt that you don't appreciate my research skills. If you were here now you'd see tears streaming down my cheeks. I live only to please arrogant trolley advocates.
ReplyDeleteAw, don't cry, "Bris". This is only a political/economic disagreement - I didn't mean to hurt your feelings by suggesting that you can answer your own questions with a little bit of sweat. Oh yeah, sweat... another foreign concept...
(Man, arrogant advocates of the excessive taxes & spending on cars/roads can be so sensitive).
"This blog, like many, many blogs, allows people to post anonymously or with registered screen names."
Right - there are people that are afraid and hide, and there are those that don't. It's just astonishing that representatives of a PAC who want their personal ideas to be held professionally and in high regard are afraid to show their faces (or in this case, even just their names). It's amusing.
"This blog will be no worse off with your absence."
Your right, it won't be worse off - you can't sink further than bottom (which is where I, too, have gone with as a result of wasting my time here).
Good day sir, or ma'am, whoever you are.
Matt, Bris,
ReplyDeleteFriendly reminder to remember the living room rule above. We value all our guests and want them to feel welcome here. Please endeavor to keep the dialogue respectful and polite. Thanks.
Goodbye Matt -
ReplyDeleteMaybe you and David Ben can meet at an all-white urban professional coffee house and sip over-priced lates while lamenting the anonymous nature of internet blog posts. Perhaps you can both wear name tags just to make sure you're both sufficiently non-anonymous. A word of warning, try not to throw your shoulder out of socket patting yourself on the back.
FYI, you can post your full name, address, social security number, and baby pictures if you want. It doesn't give your opinion any more validity than anyone else. Nobody on this blog would know you from Adam either way.