Why does COAST lie about Rail Transportation?

What really does COAST have against passenger rail transportation? They claim it's often "too damned expensive," yet you never see them opposing other expensive forms of transportation, many of which are often way more expensive than passenger rail transportation. COAST can't even make a good argument for being against passenger rail transportation. This was ever so apparent in the recent election when their passenger rail charter amendment, Issue 9, was defeated by Cincinnati voters %56 - %44.

Recently, COAST blogged about Amtrak rail service in the Northeastern Corridor being delayed due to electrical problems caused by inclement weather. What COAST conveniently failed to mention though, was that AMTRAK service was back up and running after only a three hour delay, while the roads and airports continued to be hampered, delayed and closed due to the snowstorm on the East Coast.

So after only a three hour delay, Amtrak's North Eastern Corridor was back up and running...

While the roads and airports were still affected by snow...

So COAST, why lie? Why continue to try and mislead about passenger rail transportation and not oppose the massive amounts additional taxes and spending that other transportation projects will require? You've come out in clear opposition to the Ohio 3C Passenger Rail project, but have remained completely silent on the local issues of the BILLION DOLLAR Brent Spence Bridge Replacement and $675 Million I-75 Re-Widening. Why remain silent on these instances of additional spending? Kind of goes against your group's title doesn't it?

Makes you think; who's paying and lobbying them to drum up support against passenger rail transportation and remain silent on other transportation projects that waste millions of dollars more?

To anyone reading this that may be paying/lobbying COAST to do just that: You might want to rethink who you're paying to do your dirty work. As COAST/NAACP/WEDEMANDAVOTE proved in the last election, they're not very good at it. See: Issue 9 Election Results

Mallory: "Yes" Vote Would Kill Streetcar

COAST/NAACP continue to mislead the voters!

The folks over at COAST like to throw around the word "boondoggle" a quite a bit. They claim the proposed streetcar route, if built, would be a "boondoggle" to the taxpayers despite the fact that our taxes would not be raised, nor would our tax dollars be used to pay for it's construction (the construction of the system would come from already collected capital funds and private contributions). 

In their most recent post, COAST claims the citizens have suffered through three major "boondoggles" already: 

 - A "Union Terminal Boondoggle."  

COAST unfortunately failed to look into this one and realize that Union Terminal was built privately, costing taxpayers nothing. Today, after it had been abandoned and the taxpayers voted to save the building in 1986, it exists as the Cincinnati Museum Center, one of the most popular and highly attended tourist attractions in the region.

- A "Subway" Boondoggle

Voters in 1916 approved a six million dollar bond issue to approve the construction of a Rapid Transit Loop around our great city. We can go round and round about the politics and reasons for it's abandonment, but if the current COAST/NAACP anti-passenger rail amendment passes on election day, it would prevent the subway from ever being used for it's original purpose. 

- A "Riverfront Transit Center" Boondoggle

Opened in 2002, the Riverfront Transit Center, lays beneath 2nd street currently run by System Parking who has a contract with the city. COAST considers the transit center to be a boondoggle because of it's underutilization, however their very own charter amendment would help keep the transit center from ever being utilized for it's fully intended purpose. 

As Mayor Mark Mallory said on July 28, the proposed charter amendment would end "all talk about rail" in this city. Not only would a "yes" vote kill the streetcar, but it would work to prevent Cincinnati from ever having rail as an alternative to fix it's traffic problems, but keep Cincinnati out of the proposed high speed rail network and 3C corridor, which would connect our city with other major cities! 

Do you really think the federal government when planning this project is going to sit back and say "well we'd like to include Cincinnati, but we have to put off planning for another year while they vote on it?" No, they won't even bother asking the question, they'll just pass us over or let some other nearby city take our opportunity. Don't let Cincinnati miss out on a great opportunity to make progress and become a competitive major American city yet again!

Kill the Charter Amendment!

Vote 'No' on the anti-passenger rail charter amendment.