Tuesday, August 11, 2009

All Aboard Ohio: Cincinnati anti-rail amendment 'sad and disappointing'

At its August 8 meeting, the board of directors of passenger rail advocacy group All Aboard Ohio unanimously passed a resolution opposing a possible November 3 charter amendment that would require a public vote before Cincinnati could spend capital funds to acquire right-of-way or construct improvements for any passenger rail project.

In its resolution, All Aboard Ohio noted the high costs of owning a car, the large number of households in Cincinnati that don't own a car, the inaccessibility of suburban jobs to low-income urban residents, and the region's high ozone pollution.

"The board opposes the proposed City Charter amendment as it is punitive and discriminatory against a city-building mode of transport like passenger rail service while other modes of travel that siphoned jobs, residents and wealth from the city will continue to be funded by taxpayers in the City of Cincinnati," the resolution said.

The board believes that all types of passenger rail address these issues, and All Aboard Ohio president Bill Hutchison says that the Southwestern Ohio Green Party and the Cincinnati chapter of the NAACP – part of the WeDemandAVote.com coalition that gathered signatures for the ballot issue – should take these social and environmental arguments into account.

"This is very sad to see this happening," he said. "They're really not thinking this through. Passenger rail has a strong record of bringing economic vitality and environmental quality to urban centers throughout the world. For groups who claim to want these characteristics for Cincinnati yet seek an anti-rail charter amendment is very disappointing."

The board also objected to the amendment's language, which could derail the state's 3C Corridor high-speed passenger rail plan, already under study.

According to All Aboard Ohio, passage of the charter amendment would create a barrier to investing in rail passenger and transit services that have brought billions of dollars in new investment, created jobs, and enhance livability in over three dozen cities and metropolitan areas in the United States over the last three decades.

"If the proposed amendment is approved at a time when federal and state of Ohio transportation policies and Amtrak are committed to improving and expanding the nation's intercity rail passenger network Cincinnati may be reducing its opportunity for growth of rail service and placing the present limited Amtrak service to the city at risk," the resolution said.

Earlier this month, WeDemandAVote.com submitted petition forms containing 11,530 signatures, but the charter amendment has yet to be approved for the ballot.

Previous reading on BC:
Monzel asks Cincinnati to cease and desist all streetcar activity (8/10/09)
Partnership selected to manage streetcar project (6/15/09)
Cincinnatians for Progress has new website, endorsements; WeDemandAVote.com two-thirds of way to ballot (6/9/09)
Give Back Cincinnati sessions to focus on streetcars (1/29/09)
City will issue RFP for Uptown streetcar route analysis (1/26/09)

6 comments:

COAST said...

Light bulbs?!?

Are these folks too dim to understand that the amendment only applies to 2 things?

1. Right-of-way acquisition.
2. Construction of improvements for passenger rail transortation.

How are we supposed to take them seriously when they make boneheaded statements like that?

Anonymous said...

^ Both #1 and #2 sound like road blocks to any rail progress.

Why not just say you do not want any rail period.

Ancilla said...

COAST - You're telling me that if this amendments passes, you aren't going to kick and scream every time a dollar is invested into maintaining Union Terminal or the Subway tunnels? You will claim that any routine maintenance qualifies as "improvements for passenger rail transportation".

Seeing how COAST acts (immaturely) and how they call every project they don't like a "boondoggle", I don't think AllAboardOhio's comments are that absurd.

BruceMcF said...

What the Green Party and the NAACP ought to demanding a vote on is the US Department of Transport "efficiency" forumula that favors sprawl over urban development and discriminates against public transport improvements in areas with high use of public transport.

The local Greens and the Cincinnati chapter of the NAACP acting in the interests of roadbuilders and sprawl suburban developers and against urban development is absurd.

Anonymous said...

No one is seeing this avenue. Perhaps all sides are entrenched because they either have to give up ALL they want (sadly common) or haven't had their buttons pushed to compromise as in a condemnation of past egregious undertakings like the stadia and their leases. If the pro crowd can't see the reasonable distrust, then what did you think was going to happen? Where are the outspoken on the stadiums? Why are there no outspoken proponents making a statement about the stadium shenanigans? Get real.

5chw4r7z said...

Anon,
They voted on the Stadium and look what they got!
Maybe we should let city leaders do what we elected them to do, make informed decisions for the benefit of the city.
Why does coast want to vote on an issue that will not be a tax?
As M. Miller said at the DRC when asked why are they against rail?
BECAUSE!
Hard to argue with logic like that isn't it?

Recent Comments