Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Cincinnati Streetcar Jilted by TIGER


Cincinnati rail junkies waited in eager anticipation for today's award announcement by Transportation Secretary LaHood. They were crushed to learn Cincinnati received no federal largess for the trolley boondoggle.

Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) is a $1.5 billion discretionary part of President Obama's $787 billion stimulus, or porkulus, depending on your point of view, passed exactly one year ago today. Roughly $50 were sought for every dollar available, so only 51 of 1381 projects received any funding.

Tucson, AZ was awarded $63 million for their streetcar boondoggle. Voters there passed a 1/2 cent sales tax in 2006 to fund the streetcar, among other things. The federal grant essentially completes the other half of their financial plan.

New Orleans, LA was awarded $45 million for their streetcar boondoggle. Funds will be used to extend "the longest continuously operating streetcar system in the world" along Loyola Avenue from the Union Passenger Terminal to Canal Street.

Portland, OR (genuflect when you say that) was awarded $23.2 million for their streetcar boondoggle on top of a $75 million earmark received last year. New money will rebuild streetcar lines on Moody Avenue after the road is buried under 14 feet of dirt and concrete to encapsulate hazardous waste.

Dallas, TX was awarded $23 million for their streetcar boondoggle, despite being considered a longshot in the competition. Perhaps using "Molly the Trolley" as a proof of concept demonstration for their urban circulator sealed the deal. More likely it's that they didn't sidestep their Regional Transportation Council, who already runs taxpayer supported (and voted) light rail.

30 comments:

  1. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahaha

    Seriously though, how long until Mallory/Bortz float the idea of a tax hike to pay for the trolley folley?

    Oh yeah, let me reiterate: Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

    ReplyDelete
  2. How exactly can the federal government afford all these boondoggles when they are running a $1.5 trillion deficit. Quit wasting our money!

    It says a lot that Cincinnati's streetcar plan is so laughably bad that it can't get money from our most irresponsible President ever.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Had to go back a couple of months to find this gem:

    "Gordon Bombay said...
    World on federal funding will come when the federal government releases its decisions on federal rail funds at the beginning of next year."

    Decision reached. Conclusion: not one damn penny for the Cincinnati trolley boondoggle. I eagerly await your response reminding me of the outcome of the issue nine election.

    I will respond to you in advance. The No on 9 people won the battle. COAST won the war. The Cincinnati streetcar boondoggle will NEVER be built.

    Again, Hahahahahahahahaha

    ReplyDelete
  4. 1457 projects applied for TIGER funding.

    51 received funding.

    Your odds of accepted by Harvard Law School are three times better.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Odds of a proposal for a tax increase to fund this boondoggle - better than average.

    Odss that Randy Simes would endorse said tax increase no matter what the terms - 100%.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hey Mark Miller, I mean Bim (sorry I get your fake names screwed up all the time) still plenty of more announcements and grants to come along. Will the project get them? We'll see.

    You're right, I will remind you of the Issue 9 results, since that joke is one thing we don't have standing in our way.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I wouldn't go trumpeting "mission accomplished" just yet there COAST.

    Just as rail supports ought not get over excited prior to each potential funding announcements, it would be equally foolish for COAST to gloat that one of the several federal and state funding sources did not pan out.

    There are still plenty of other opportunities for our already submitted applications to recieve funding.

    ReplyDelete
  8. David,

    Bim seems pretty giddy about it, but we're quite a bit less enthused.

    The risk now is that the city will receive partial funding on one of the other grants, and still try to proceed with the project. Urban Circulators, for example, has a max award of only $25 million. Dohoney has said that we need at least $60 million from the feds to move forward.

    That would leave Cincinnati taxpayers holding the bag for the difference. Not a pretty picture when we're too broke to pay for basic needs.

    ReplyDelete
  9. That is an absolutely reasonalbe concern. Please recall that the Urban Circulator grant is just one of the several federal grants still pending, not to mention potential state money. I still have confidence that non-city money, in all its various forms, will come through as planned. That's why I cautioned against declairing that you have "won the war."

    ReplyDelete
  10. Poor wittle Gordy has to skip down the street with no federal taxpayer money in his pockets. Learn to love your automobile, or conversely a metro bus, because barring a tax increase that is the ONLY way you're going to get shuttled around the trolley folley route.

    PS - Just a little while ago you accused me of being Stephan Louis. Then you said you were sure I was not Mark Miller. Now I'm Mark Miller again. HAHA. FAIL. Maybe you can call Bobby Maly and ask him who he thinks I am. FYI - you'll have to dial an 859 area code because he doesn't live in Cincinnati.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Aww Bim its so cute that no matter what fake name you post under you and anonymous other fake names are the only voices of support for COAST.

    Glad to see you've already determined how the multiple other funding grants will be awarded, must be using your Chris Smitherman patented Crystal Ball.

    Start lying and spreading false fear about a tax increase, all your other lies and tactics seemed to have failed you when you lost Issue 9 and you were posting as "Bris Chortz."

    ReplyDelete
  12. God you COAST people really are a sad and pathetic group of losers. The fact that you're actually happy about Cincinnati not getting a chunk of YOUR federal tax dollars and that they are instead going to other cities that you don't live in makes absolutely no sense.
    Again, you haven't won any wars here. You lost a long time ago. You did absolutely nothing to influence state or federal decisions on who gets stimulus dollars so how can you go around saying you've won a war?
    However, your ignorance and hatred towards all things not suburban and not associated with the automobile is kind of endearing. I think you've converted me to your evil ways...Let's just bull-doze OTR and turn it into a giant free parking lot. Then, lets stop all govt. spending except fixing pot holes and bull-dozing more land for parking. God I can't wait to drive my car to McDonald's again today!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Jean-François FlechetFebruary 17, 2010 at 7:29 PM

    It is difficult for me to undersand would have been so wrong for Cincinnati to receive money from the state government, create jobs and prosperity.

    Explain me COAST; what have we won today? Sadly, the jobs that could have been created in Cincinnati are going to Portland and New Orleans. Is that a reason for cheering?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Jean-François,

    Cincinnati didn't win or lose anything today. We're the same wonderful city we've been since last week, last year, etc.

    Receiving federal money is only the beginning. With it comes the responsibility of financing the remainder of the capital project cost, and funding the ongoing operating costs for many decades.

    Our present dire financial position would require that we cut the most basic and necessary government services to meet that obligation. Federal authorities were evidently not comfortable enough with the fiscal sustainability of our prospectus to participate.

    Other cities were judged to be better positioned to implement their plans and successfully see them through. We should wish them well, and endeavor to improve our own financial health to one day be worthy of the same.

    Professional negotiators often say "no deal is better than a bad deal." Today we avoided getting into a deal that our city is economically incapable of following through on. It's not a cause for joyous celebration, but it is a relief.

    ReplyDelete
  15. It's interesting to me that I haven't commented on this blog for some time, nor have I stated anything about being in favor or against any made up sales tax...but yet I somehow get drug into the conversation by this mythical Bim Turke.

    Don't put words into my mouth Mr. Turke, and don't make up wild hypotheticals just to make your wild points more valid.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Randy! I'll agree that you're entitled to state your own opinions. So, which of the taxes on the 2009 ballot did you oppose?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Randy,
    You could not show up ever again and it would not change the fact that you supported every singel tax increase on the ballot in Hamilton County last year. Not putting words in anyon's mouth, just holding you to your voting record.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I find it interesting that somehow everyone knows how I voted. Can any of you prove my voting record or history? If not, you're simply throwing more allegations out there that you can't support with any evidence.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I didn't accuse you of supporting anything. That's why I asked you the question.

    The accusation game is between you and others. I'm Charlie Seicer, not Burke or anyone else.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Well Charlie Seicer, get to know me and come out to have a drink sometime and maybe I'll decide at that point whether I share my personal voting record with you. I don't share that kind of information with anonymous people on the internet.

    ReplyDelete
  21. When challenged, Randy could not name one single tax increase on the ballot that he was against. That is a FACT. You seem to have no problem telling us how you voted on Issue 9. I guess its only embarrassing admissions of unquestioned support for higher taxes that you refuse to share with "anonymous people on the internet."

    Randy is against talking about his voting record, unless he's for it.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Randy... aren't you currently living in Atlanta, Georgia? Haven't you been living there since June of 2009?

    How then, is it possible for you to have even voted in the City of Cincinnati's 2009 election if you are no longer a permanent resident of the area?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Don't forget that Randy also shared with us (repeatedly)his "private" voting record on the library tax.

    Again, Randy is against sharing his voting record "with anonymous people on the internet" unless he's for it.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Like I said, I will not disclose my voting record on a public forum to a bunch of raging anonymous people. Those who know me know my political stance on the issues. Those who don't can pretend to know my stance, but in actuality that's all they're doing - pretending to know.

    In the past November election I made my opinion clear on Issue 9, the Cincinnati/Hamilton County Public Library levy, and several of the politicians running for office...most notably Mayor Mallory.

    If you want to find out how I voted on the rest of the issues, where I voted, if I voted, or how I prefer my eggs, then I suggest you get to know me beyond your computer and the fake name(s) you hide behind.

    ReplyDelete
  25. "Like I said, I will not disclose my voting record on a public forum to a bunch of raging anonymous people."

    Translation - I voted for every single tax increase on the ballot in November's election.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Well, we know this about Bim Turke:
    He worked for the government for 8 years and received his paychecks from our tax dollars. If you want to see a hypocrite, look no further. For somebody beating the drum of no more taxes, his own socialized income is pretty laughable.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I will move from Cincinnati before they hike taxes for this stupid and financially irresponsible streetcar. If you do not have the financial capital to build the project, then you should not build it at all. There should be zero grants and zero subsidies. Subsidies are the precise indicator that the project will not be financially stable meaning that the debt that is left over after the fares are factored in will be left to the taxpayers. This is absolutely ridiculous when the street car will only sever a select group of the Cincinnati population. Cincinnati is turning into a Czar....

    ReplyDelete
  28. Maybe I should try to get a tax hike on the ballot to subsidize my salary. I guarantee Travis will vote for it, much like his support for every single tax hike on the ballot this past November.

    ReplyDelete
  29. We already know Randy Simes would support it.

    ReplyDelete
  30. The streetcar got $15 million funding from the State. Hahahahahahahahahahaha.
    Oh yeah, Bim, let me reiterate:
    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

    ha

    ha

    ha

    ReplyDelete

We follow the "living room" rule. Exhibit the same courtesy you would show guests in your home.