Thursday, April 26, 2012

Conflict of interest? SORTA Board member Jim Tarbell buys two properties right next to Streetcar stop. Hmmmm.

Cincinnati.Com has the story here.  They forgot to mention Tarbell sits on the SORTA Board that 's working with the City on Streetcar construction.   Someone should call B.S. to this, and COAST is just the someone to do that.

Didn't the Ohio Ethics Commission already rule that this is a no-no?

Update: Enquirer has updated its story with COAST's challenge and new info.  Sounds like they will chase some of this down by morning.  Good.  Shine a spotlight on this turd.  It appears the opposition is scrambling to justify the unjustifiable and that the profiteering of the few, the powerful, the insiders has begun!

This could be a new avocation of COASTers: figure out who has their hand in the $125 million Streetcar cookie jar.  I am sure we would find many of Cincinnati's crisp, bright, shiny leaders with some chocolate chips under their fingernails, maybe even someone with their mug painted on a prominent downtown building.


  1. Hahaha did that fat slob Craig Hochscheid just get ANOTHER one of his hateful posts deleted? When is that loser Craig Hochscheid going to get a life?

  2. Fat Wife CincyCapellHochscheidApril 26, 2012 at 5:57 PM

    Craig, I'll be home in 15 minutes. I want dinner on the table when I walk through the door. None of that low-fat junk either.

    - Tabitha

  3. This is a serious issue. If Tarbell is trying to profit off decisions he makes in an official capacity that's a very troubling situation.

  4. Get over it. The streetcar's coming and it doesn't matter how many fake issues you boys try to bring out of it. You lost the issue in an election twice.

    What specific law says Tarbell can't buy property on a streetcar route that was already well established years ago? What law says he can't buy on a bus route?

    Nice try at making a non issue an issue though.

    Queue someone under a fake name to drop more insults...

  5. If the streetcar is going to be such a boondoggle that provides no value to the city or property values along the route, then what is the problem?

    Seems like this is only a conflict if you are willing to admit that the streetcar will improve the city? Which are you going to pick?

  6. The problem is that eventually SORTA will be purchasing that same property from Tarbell to build the streetcar station. Thus, he will be on both sides of the transaction. Pretty much page 1 of ethics 101 textbook!

  7. So now Jim Tarbell owns public sidewalks?

    They won't need his property to build a station shelter on a sidewalk they already own.

    Grasping at straws.

  8. "The problem is that eventually SORTA will be purchasing that same property from Tarbell to build the streetcar station. Thus, he will be on both sides of the transaction. Pretty much page 1 of ethics 101 textbook!"

    Nope, unless you're stupid enough to think that the city would have to buy the rights to use the sidewalk in front of a property. I guess I should be charging SORTA for the bus stop in front of my house?

  9. "If the streetcar is going to be such a boondoggle that provides no value to the city or property values along the route, then what is the problem?"

    It's taxpayer money that is being risked. It's possible the streetcar is a success, in which case many people will benefit. If not, then it's taxpayer dollars that get wasted.

    Just like the stadiums and other forms of corporate welfare - the people who stand to benefit the most are not the ones taking the risk. Taxpayers are the ones holding the bag if expectations aren't realized.

  10. ^Still doesn't answer the question.

    - How was Tarbell's purchase a conflict of interest?

  11. Jim Tarbell looks like the monopoly guy on heroin.

  12. Gordon, that's because I was answering another guy's question. To answer yours....

    Tarbell is putting himself in position to profit off of decisions he may be making in his official govt capacity. It's a conflict of interest when your government decisions can bring you significant personal gain.

  13. Except, he didn't make any decisions that would affect him "profiting." He didn't vote to determine the route, didn't vote to determine the location of the stops, etc. City Council votes on those decisions. When Bortz (who owned property along the line) served on City Council, the OEC "recommended" he abstain from voting on the issue - note that there's no official law against it especially in Tarbell's position.

    Not to mention, the route and its stops have been public knowledge for years and anyone can buy property along those routes just as you and I can buy property along the "1 for fun," TANK #11 or Oasis lines.

    Your ethics argument holds no merit.

  14. Seriously Gordon? The streetcar route has changed as often as the weather. It can still change some more since Cincinnati lacks the funding to fully complete the current planned route. SORTA is going to operate this streetcar. No, this doesn't look good for Tarbell.

  15. Uh, yeah, seriously.

    And, you should get your facts straight.

    The route has been basically the same since the first failed COAST ballot initiative happened.

    Cincinnati does have the funding in line for Phase I, Phase II up to Clifton is what's being debated and is currently not under construction. Only the funded Phase I is. Even if the route were to change Tarbell is no longer on SORTA's board and there was no law preventing him from buying his property when he was on SORTA's board. Speaking of which, SORTA didn't play a hand in determining the route before when Tarbell was there.

    Tarbell's fine. Nice trick though, streetcar construction must really be bothering the COAST crew.

    Could you please pass me one of the straws your grasping at? I'd like to drink a coke.

  16. "streetcar construction"? How many feet of rail have been laid?

  17. ^Rail and catenary wire are the two last parts that get installed. Utility relocation comes first.

    Regular updates can be seen here:

  18. Gordon Bombay wrote:

    "Queue someone under a fake name to drop more insults..."

    Yeah, we're sure your real name is Gordon Bombay. Are we to believe your parents named you after a fictional pee-wee hockey coach?

  19. ^I wish, it'd be much cooler than my real one. This is the handle I use for my website which features my real name all over it.

    Perhaps I should've said "ironic" name since those seem to be the ones who come on here solely to drop insults.


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