President Ono speaks out on the streetcar. He is in favor of the second phase of the project. The million dollar question is how is this project going to be paid for? Is UC and other uptown businesses willing to front the cash or are they putting it on the backs of the taxpayers?

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/201.../81859896/

You have to believe that someone on City Council is was calling Ono about five minutes after his speech looking for some help in paying for phase 2.

Big 12 money

Big 12 money us a falacy. It will only replace to amount of money that UC subsidizes the athletic department from the general fund. That is currently about 25M per year. If UC is invited to the Big 12, the general fund stands to save that amount every year. I am sure there will be a bump in budget, but don't get too excited about the numbers quoted.

(03-16-2016 08:43 PM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  Big 12 money us a falacy. It will only replace to amount of money that UC subsidizes the athletic department from the general fund. That is currently about 25M per year. If UC is invited to the Big 12, the general fund stands to save that amount every year. I am sure there will be a bump in budget, but don't get too excited about the numbers quoted.

...Wait a minute here....I thought most of the talking heads on this board indicated that all the $$ for the new construction was from "private donations" and not the general fund.

I think we smell something rotten in the pub from the AD...

(03-17-2016 06:44 AM)Not Duane Wrote:  

(03-16-2016 08:43 PM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  Big 12 money us a falacy. It will only replace to amount of money that UC subsidizes the athletic department from the general fund. That is currently about 25M per year. If UC is invited to the Big 12, the general fund stands to save that amount every year. I am sure there will be a bump in budget, but don't get too excited about the numbers quoted.

...Wait a minute here....I thought most of the talking heads on this board indicated that all the $$ for the new construction was from "private donations" and not the general fund.

I think we smell something rotten in the pub from the AD...

You are right...all the money for new construction is private through donations and new fees.

The $25M subsidy is for keeping the Athletic Department operating. College athletics does not create enough revenue to support itself. That is true in about all but 4 or 5 schools. But to think that new revenue from a P-5 invite will be a pure new revenue stream is a dream. There is no way that the subsidy will not be reduced as the Athletic Department sees a new revenue source. So, if we get an additional $15-20M from a P-5 conference, the subsidy will be reduced by some amount. Let's say it is reduced by $17 million. The net gain would be an extra $3 million if our number is $20M from the league.

Why does Ono back streetcar? It's about jobs
Jason Williams, jwilliams@enquirer.com 10:25 p.m. EDT March 16, 2016


Santa Ono wants Cincinnati's streetcar to be expanded to Uptown to serve the University of Cincinnati, giving the controversial project the high-profile and widely respected community champion it has never had.

Whether Ono's influence is enough to help bring a divided City Hall together on the streetcar remains to be seen, but he made it clear in an interview with The Enquirer on Wednesday that it's not UC's job to pay for the expansion.

UC's president decided to break his yearslong silence on the streetcar after spending the past 1 ½ years traveling to other U.S. cities and seeing how passenger rail plays a role in helping to attract and retain an energetic and talented workforce.

"Let’s be honest: What we have now is not the original vision of the streetcar," Ono said. "It was meant to connect the region's two largest jobs hubs. For the good of UC students, for the future of the city and for our growth as a high-tech hub, it’s going to be important to expand the streetcar so we can be competitive."

Ono officially made his first public comments about expanding the streetcar several weeks ago while delivering a speech about technology and innovation to several hundreds of college and high school students. A video of Ono's speech was posted to YouTube this week.

His public support of the streetcar is a significant step for the popular UC president, who usually doesn't wade into controversial political issues. Ono leads a $1 billion institution and the region's largest employer. He's now gone where Fortune 500 CEOs and other top regional business and community leaders haven't – saying something publicly about the streetcar.

"Santa Ono is a well-respected regional leader who has not delved into politics and who is saying that he believes the streetcar should come to Uptown because he genuinely believes it will be better for the city," Councilman Chris Seelbach said. "I think more and more people, regardless of political affiliation, understand this investment is helping drive incredible economic development and jobs."

Ono: Streetcar comments not about politics

The timing of Ono's comments is interesting, coming around the same time union leader Rob Richardson Jr. was appointed chairman of UC's board of trustees in February. Richardson is a streetcar supporter, and he is among those talked about in political circles as a potential challenger to anti-streetcar Mayor John Cranley in the 2017 mayoral race.

The streetcar ultimately could be the deciding issue in the race – just like it was in 2013. Then, it was about whether to continue to build the Downtown and Over-the-Rhine loop, which is scheduled to open to the public in September. Next year, it'll be about expanding the streetcar to Uptown.

Ono insisted his comments weren't politically orchestrated.

"The last thing I want to do is get involved in politics," Ono said. "It has nothing to do with politics. It has nothing to do with Rob Richardson. It has nothing to do with Mayor Cranley. It has to do with my honest view of what’s needed to help stimulate the economy."

Cranley responded Wednesday by saying UC and other Uptown businesses and institutions are welcome to expand the streetcar if they pay for it. Questions remain about whether the city's funding plan to run the first phase will work.

"It would be irresponsible to spend money on something that we don’t know yet how it’s going to work out," Cranley said. "We don’t have the money.”

Other universities connected by rail

Ono has been very aggressive about establishing UC as a cutting-edge training ground for high-tech jobs. He's also worked with Cincinnati's Fortune 500 CEOs and other top business leaders to grow tech jobs, and Ono speaks across the U.S. about technology and innovation.

During his travels, Ono has visited universities in or near Boston, St. Louis, Phoenix and Baltimore in which the campuses are connected to jobs centers by passenger rail lines. In Phoenix, for example, Arizona State University has a downtown satellite campus that students can connect to from the main campus in suburban Tempe via light rail.

"I visit a lot cities that we compete with for jobs in Cincinnati," Ono said, "and most of those cities have more mature public transportation systems than we do."

He added: "When you look at what new college graduates and mid-career, high-tech individuals want to move to a new location for a job, one of the first things that pops up is access to public transportation."

UC currently is considering moving its law school to Downtown on The Banks, which is on the streetcar route. Also, Ono told The Enquirer the university is considering bringing a satellite location for the business school to Downtown.

Even still, Ono said it's not part of a university's mission to pay for transportation infrastructure. He said in his research he's not found any examples of a university helping to pay for a public transportation project.

But Ono has been in contact with City Councilwoman Amy Murray about UC and City Hall working together to find money and develop a plan to expand the streetcar route. Murray chairs Council's transportation committee.

"I want to make it very clear that I understand the business demand for the current streetcar loop and any expansion is unclear," Ono said.

The streetcar becomes a viable transportation option with expansion, he added. "If you have a short loop and people aren’t riding it, it’s a disaster," Ono said. "It's apparent if you link Uptown and Downtown, you will significantly increase ridership. It will make the business plan viable. I’m not saying we have the answers yet, but we would be happy to help."

The city currently must focus solely on making sure it can cover operations costs for the first phase, Murray said. The city believes it has enough money to cover a $1.2 million structural deficit over the first two years of operations, but skepticism remains about revenues related to fares, advertising and naming rights.

"In other cities, the only way that streetcars have worked is when businesses, institutions and property owners along the route pay for it," Murray said. “There are a lot of things that we want, but we have to be able to afford them.”

Uptown phase has been uphill battle

Original plans called for a $110 million streetcar route to run from Downtown to Uptown, with the line connecting near the southeast corner of UC's campus. But the Uptown portion had to be scrapped in 2011 after Gov. John Kasich pulled all $52 million in state money for the project.

The occasional talk of expansion has led to more hand-wringing over the project at City Hall. There's been no new cost estimate on the Uptown route, but utility relocation costs are expected to be significantly higher than on the first phase.

Duke Energy has said it would cost $38 million to relocate one of the city's main power lines running underneath Vine Street.

Much like Downtown companies, UC, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center and other major Uptown employers have remained mostly silent about the streetcar. They've feared stepping into the political crosshairs, but Ono may have opened the door for more leaders to step up in support of the streetcar.

"It is exciting to hear leaders like President Ono publicly declaring their support for completing the streetcar to Uptown," said Ryan Messer, founder of Believe in Cincinnati, a streetcar advocacy group. "We look forward to the city developing a thorough, economically sound plan that will enable this to happen in a fiscally responsible way."

Enquirer reporter Sharon Coolidge contributed.

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/201.../81859896/

(03-17-2016 06:44 AM)Not Duane Wrote:  

(03-16-2016 08:43 PM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  Big 12 money us a falacy. It will only replace to amount of money that UC subsidizes the athletic department from the general fund. That is currently about 25M per year. If UC is invited to the Big 12, the general fund stands to save that amount every year. I am sure there will be a bump in budget, but don't get too excited about the numbers quoted.

...Wait a minute here....I thought most of the talking heads on this board indicated that all the $$ for the new construction was from "private donations" and not the general fund.

I think we smell something rotten in the pub from the AD...

Did you read what you responded to? You might want to try again.

Honestly since they are building it, it should go to UC. I would have made it down to more downtown events and games if the Street car existed 20+ years ago. Lots of students could take advantage to make it easier to get downtown.

(03-17-2016 10:35 AM)BigDawg Wrote:  Honestly since they are building it, it should go to UC. I would have made it down to more downtown events and games if the Street car existed 20+ years ago. Lots of students could take advantage to make it easier to get downtown.

I think that's right; what they have now is half a loaf. Connecting Uptown with OTR, Downtown and the Banks is a no brainer if you're going to have a streetcar at all. From what I've read, the cost to climb the hill in terms of infrastructure and powering up the units to ascend is extraordinary.

One problem -- the streetcars the city purchased do not have the power/traction to make it up the hill to Clifton. So, if they build Phase II, either they will have to replace the cars OR riders will not be able to go non-stop from UC to the Banks. They will have to switch cars at the bottom of the hill. Gotta love City Hall!

Untrue. We evaluated five vehicles for their ability to climb Vine Street. Only one of them, the Siemens S-70, was rejected because the engineers doubted it's ability to make the grade with a full load of passengers

Read more: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.ph...z43GJtzMh9

I suspect this signals that UC is serious about moving the law school downtown.

(03-16-2016 04:58 PM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  You have to believe that someone on City Council is was calling Ono about five minutes after his speech looking for some help in paying for phase 2.

(03-18-2016 02:17 PM)JackieTreehorn Wrote:  I suspect this signals that UC is serious about moving the law school downtown.

Yes they are serious, and there is talk of the business school offering some programs as well, which makes sense with thousands of office workers there.

Note that Ono did his research and found no evidence of universities footing the bill for projects like this. As president of UC, it is his duty to do whatever it takes to advance UC's cause. In this case, he wants to connect the main campus with the planned downtown campus.

Also, Ono is not the only person who has supported the streetcar. GE cited the streetcar as one of a number of reasons it located at The Banks. The casino wanted the route to come by their property. Rheingeist has openly expressed pleasure at having a stop outside their front door. And any number of developers in OTR have bought in to building along the route.

(03-18-2016 08:57 AM)toledophisher Wrote:  Untrue. We evaluated five vehicles for their ability to climb Vine Street. Only one of them, the Siemens S-70, was rejected because the engineers doubted it's ability to make the grade with a full load of passengers

Read more: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.ph...z43GJtzMh9

Who is "we" and where is the link to the public documents showing the evaluations?

(03-20-2016 10:23 AM)QSECOFR Wrote:  

(03-18-2016 08:57 AM)toledophisher Wrote:  Untrue. We evaluated five vehicles for their ability to climb Vine Street. Only one of them, the Siemens S-70, was rejected because the engineers doubted it's ability to make the grade with a full load of passengers

Read more: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.ph...z43GJtzMh9

Who is "we" and where is the link to the public documents showing the evaluations?

Some of the people posting at Urban Ohio are flipping radicals. One of the mods is a self admitted Marxist.

(03-20-2016 12:31 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-20-2016 10:23 AM)QSECOFR Wrote:  

(03-18-2016 08:57 AM)toledophisher Wrote:  Untrue. We evaluated five vehicles for their ability to climb Vine Street. Only one of them, the Siemens S-70, was rejected because the engineers doubted it's ability to make the grade with a full load of passengers

Read more: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.ph...z43GJtzMh9

Who is "we" and where is the link to the public documents showing the evaluations?

Some of the people posting at Urban Ohio are flipping radicals. One of the mods is a self admitted Marxist.

Ok, the topic is streetcars, not the political leanings of people posting about streetcars. Are the streetcars powerful enough to climb Vine Street hill or not?

I'd like to know.

(03-20-2016 10:23 AM)QSECOFR Wrote:  

(03-18-2016 08:57 AM)toledophisher Wrote:  Untrue. We evaluated five vehicles for their ability to climb Vine Street. Only one of them, the Siemens S-70, was rejected because the engineers doubted it's ability to make the grade with a full load of passengers

Read more: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.ph...z43GJtzMh9

Who is "we" and where is the link to the public documents showing the evaluations?

It would appear that "we" means anonymous troll who makes stuff up to further an agenda.