2013 Election (Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati: moving to, car, office)

[Zen_master]

Does any kind soul care to help me understand what is going on with the streetcar project?

From what I gather, the election of a new ceremonial mayor has somehow halted the project. I am also hearing that residents voted in favor of the streetcar twice. What specific votes were these? Was there a levy to pay for the streetcar? if not, perhaps one should be put on the ballot.

And lastly, I read that council voted 5-4 to halt the streetcar. What explains the shift in council's position? My understanding is even if there are new members elected this past November they would not have been sworn in yet. And presumably if the streetcar was moving ahead prior to November this same council would have approved it. So what gives? Why the different vote out of council chambers?

[Komeht]

The funding is quite complicated and comes from a number of sources including a state grants, bonds, local funds, regional contributions and money from the FTA. Though Kasich took away 52 Million that had been previously awarded despite it being rated as the Ohio DOT's top rated project.

There were referenda in 2009 and 2011.

The 2009 referendum would have forced a public vote on any rail-based system. So it did not specifically target the streetcar, though of course it would have been the most immediately affected project. It lost 56% to 44%

The 2011 referendum would have banned ANY spending on rail until December 31 2020 - an amazingly bad idea but it only lost 52% to 48%.

Fast forward to 2013 - Cranley did indeed run opposed to the Streetcar. But what was not clear and what was not expressed during the campaign was that stopping the project:

1. Would likely cost as much, or more, than finishing the project, and

2. Stopping the project would not only mean losing 40 or 50 million in funding of the project from the FTA and an immediate demand by the federal government for it's money back (money that has already been spent and that will be wasted) that will have to come out of the general operating fund, but also that ALL FUTURE TRANSIT PROJECTS, no matter their merit, are at risk because the FTA will likely never invest a dime into Cincinnati again.

Opposing rail is one thing - but killing the project, at this stage, and giving taxpayers ZERO return on their substantial investments is nothing short of the worst abuse of public power I've seen on the local level.

BTW - the council is split 5/4 - so any claims of a "mandate" are absurd.

Cranley has stated he doesn't feel bad about reneging on promises made by previous city councils that he disagreed with. That is a remarkably short sighted way to run government. I'm quite certain that bondholders don't see it that way and the businesses in contractural agreements with the city, I guarantee you, do not see it that way either. Though there may be shifts in policy and elections should have consequences, it is the height of irresponsibility and wastefulness to throw away money like Cranley intends to do just because he opposed the project prior to being elected.

[hensleya1]

Originally Posted by Zen_master

Does any kind soul care to help me understand what is going on with the streetcar project?

And lastly, I read that council voted 5-4 to halt the streetcar. What explains the shift in council's position? My understanding is even if there are new members elected this past November they would not have been sworn in yet. And presumably if the streetcar was moving ahead prior to November this same council would have approved it. So what gives? Why the different vote out of council chambers?

The new council was sworn in on December 1. First on the incoming council's agenda was putting a stop to the streetcar. They were only in office for all of three days before they had this vote - it was their plan all along.

[Komeht]

Originally Posted by hensleya1

The new council was sworn in on December 1. First on the incoming council's agenda was putting a stop to the streetcar. They were only in office for all of three days before they had this vote - it was their plan all along.

They proceeded in the face of having a cost free option to continue for 1 week to assess the actual costs of staying not this path. It is an abominable breach of the public trust by a cabal of folks hell bent on a crusade against rail.

[Zen_master]

Thank you, all. That helps me get up to speed.

[kjbrill]

Originally Posted by Zen_master

Thank you, all. That helps me get up to speed.

Another thing which needs to be emphasized was the extremely low percentage of registered voters who turned out for the 2013 election. The con-streetcar forces did win handily over the pro- and it is sad more voters did not bother to vote. But with the low voter turnout I hardly call it a mandate as much as voter apathy. And a 5/4 margin on council is hardly a mandate either. And I have to agree it does not bode well for any rail project in the Greater Cincinnati area getting any future Federal funds.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by kjbrill

Another thing which needs to be emphasized was the extremely low percentage of registered voters who turned out for the 2013 election. The con-streetcar forces did win handily over the pro- and it is sad more voters did not bother to vote. But with the low voter turnout I hardly call it a mandate as much as voter apathy. And a 5/4 margin on council is hardly a mandate either. And I have to agree it does not bode well for any rail project in the Greater Cincinnati area getting any future Federal funds.

Or any significant infrastructure projects needing federal funds. Cincinnati has likely been blacklisted from this point forward.

Low turnout for a mayoral election is nothing uncommon in the US, so it's not surprising in Cincinnati. People just forgot that elections have consequences.

[kjbrill]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

Or any significant infrastructure projects needing federal funds. Cincinnati has likely been blacklisted from this point forward.

Low turnout for a mayoral election is nothing uncommon in the US, so it's not surprising in Cincinnati. People just forgot that elections have consequences.

Yes they do, and now Cincinnati is going to have to live with it. What a coincidence terms were just increased from two years to four. Isn't that great timing.

[Komeht]

A Streetcar Named Disaster - By the Numbers:

$30 Million to $45 Million (depending on Duke lawsuit)- Construction/Design/Acquisition Costs to date
$4 Million - repayment to the Federal Government for funds already spent
$41 Million - Additional forfeited Federal grants
$31 Million to $48 Million - closeout costs

$113 Million to $145 Million - cost to shut down rail

$133 Million to $148 Million - cost to finish rail

Note - the closeout costs DO NOT INCLUDE the cost of lawsuits by contractors building streetcars, streetcar line, maintenance facility and stations. If lawsuits are filed (and be sure they will be) then there will be additional litigation and settlement costs on top of the above.

Zip - that's what Cincinnati will have to show if it is cancelled.

But that's not all - this is what else Cincinnati will lose:

200 jobs lost
Canceled contributions to renovate the Globe Building and the Music Hall, contributions to the Smale Riverfront Park, and the shared kitchen facility in Findlay Market,
500 Million in ad valoram taxes foregone (estimate based on increased property value with Streetcar)
Unquantifiable amounts in future Federal funds and grants foregone

But here's what Cincinnati will gain:

A reputation as an unreliable partner
A reputation as a city that will kill transit projects not based on common sense but on ideology

Cranley is going to have to make one helluva a case to explain why canceling - at this stage - is the fiscally prudent thing to do for the city of Cincinnati.

[progmac]

the thing is, everyone knows it is absurd. cranley knows it is absurd. i think something more insidious is afoot. everyone knows council doesn't control this town. part of me wonders if somehow part of the city's investment in the streetcar will be privatized.