Thursday, August 9, 2012

Blue Ash Council buys itself litigation and a referendum

Tonight, as expected, Blue Ash City Council enacted by a 6-1 vote an ordinance to re-do the 6-year-old purchase of the Blue Ash Airport property from the City of Cincinnati to allow the proceeds to be used for the boondoggle Cincinnati streetcar project.

Unfortunately for the pro-streetcar folks, COAST believes the Council enacted the ordinance improperly, which may (after analysis from the COAST legal team) result in Court action to stop it and, concurrently, COAST is launching a referendum on the Ordinance to place the issue before the City's voters.

If you want to assist in the referendum petition drive, contact Mark Miller at 617-2263.

Through the use of some creative -- but inaccurate and deceptive -- wording of the ordinance by Blue Ash's counsel, Council has tried to avoid the citizens referendum right.  COAST's counsel is hopeful the Courts will see through that and force a citizen vote on the ordinance.

If the Council had turned down the Ordinance tonight, the City's ownership of 130 acres of Airport property would continue, and the City of Cincinnati would have turned over possession to Blue Ash in September.

As it stands now, if COAST can succeed in putting the issue before the voters, the deal could be delayed as much as 14 months, or turned down entirely.

Mayor Mark Weber was the hero of the evening, voting against the measure.

Voting for the measure were Lee Czerwonka, James Sumner, Stephanie Stoller, Rick Bryan, Robert Buckman, Jr., and Thomas Adamec.

We are hopeful the voters of Blue Ash will take note and have long memories of those who cost their City money, and potentially significantly delayed the development of their park, because of the need to "go along to get along" with the big-government agenda in Cincinnati.

We assure you this will not be the last time COAST writes of their ignominious treachery.

15 comments:

  1. You're going down for this vote Sumner. I won't forget.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The people of Blue Ash already voted 4 years ago. We want the park!

    COAST is the one that wouold cost the city money and time by delaying the project, not council.

    I am as unhappy about the choo choo as everyone else, but lets not drag Blue Ash into it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Blue Ash takes possession of the park land at the end of this month no matter what.

    Blue Ash dragged themselves into it when they went over and above their contract to help Mallory get his his trolley dollars by screwing the FAA.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why would the citizens of blue ash care about the streetcar? This actually SAVES the City of Blue Ash $250,000. Aren't you all about saving money? Blue Ash just saved money and added 0 extra costs (except your lawsuit).

      Delete
  4. "Blue Ash dragged themselves into it when they went over and above their contract to help Mallory get his his trolley dollars by screwing the FAA."

    The FAA suggested this course to both cities.

    ReplyDelete
  5. How many of yesterday's speakers were actually Blue Ash residents?

    Why did Chris Finney leave before the end of the meeting?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Editing out the question everyone wants to know shows exactly why you won't answer the question...

    How many of the public speakers at the city council meeting were actually Blue Ash residents?!?

    COASTer Jeff Capell and?!?

    ReplyDelete
  7. It was the FAA who changed their rules back in 09 or 2010 and suggested this course of action in order to move the process along for Cincinnati and Blue Ash to transfer possession of the airport. The FAA most certainly has not made $37 million in improvements to this small airport -- I'd be surprised if they've spent $5 million in the past 50 years. Cincinnati bought the property with its own money back in 1946 and should be able to sell it and use the proceeds as it wishes. Blue Ash raised its earnings tax in 2006 to purchase the property and convert it into a park. It is COAST who is obstructing the will of Blue Ash voters, not Cincinnati!

    ReplyDelete
  8. "How many of the public speakers at the city council meeting were actually Blue Ash residents?!?"

    Most of them. In addition, at least 3/4 of the packed crowd were Blue Ash residents. One by one Blue Ash residents asked their Council to leave the 2007 deal alone and stay out of Cincinnati's streetcar.

    "Why would the citizens of blue ash care about the streetcar?"

    Their interest in the streetcar was merely the desire to stay out of it. Blue Ash citizens lobbied their officials to leave the 2007 agreement alone. However, Council rescinded that "final" agreement to help Cincinnati with their streetcar.

    Blue Ash citizens don't care what Cincinnati does with their money. However, they don't want Blue Ash City Council to rip up a 2007 deal that gives them their airport property just to help Cincinnati with their streetcar. Blue Ash doesn't want to be involved with it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "It was the FAA who.....suggested this course of action in order to move the process along for Cincinnati and Blue Ash to transfer possession of the airport."

    Not correct. The airport itself is getting shut down, I'm assuming you meant the property that Blue Ash bought. The 2007 agreement required the possession of the property to be turned over to Blue Ash by August 2012. Ripping up the final agreement from 2007 doesn't move anything along, except Cincinnati's streetcar, which Blue Ash Council should not have concerned themselves with.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Say, are there any good restaurants in Blue Ash? Me and my fat wife Tabitha are always on the lookout for a new pigout.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Craig stop playing around on the Internet. I'm hungry!

      Delete
  11. Jeff Cappell needs to run for council.

    ReplyDelete
  12. That the Cincinnati Council wants to use the proceeds from the sale of part of the airport property for the streetcar simply ISN'T Blue Ash's problem. Blue Ash Council is working in the best interests of its residents - to complete the property sale. Focus your argument on your opponent - Cincinnati Council. Steve Tosh, Blue Ash.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Clean out City CouncilAugust 16, 2012 at 10:59 AM

    Steve, your information is incorrect. The City of Blue Ash completed the purchase of the property in 2007. The contract called for possession to be delivered this month. It was a done deal.

    Blue Ash has jeopardized that by agreeing to rescind the deal. Cincinnati will take repossession of the property and does not have to sell it back to Blue Ash.

    Blue Ash is taking a huge risk to help Cincinnati with their streetcar problem. You're right, the streetcar isn't Blue Ash's problem. Except that Blue Ash Council has made it one.

    ReplyDelete

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